[House Hearing, 111 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
ENHANCING THE RELEVANCE OF
SPACE TO ADDRESS NATIONAL NEEDS
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON SPACE AND AERONAUTICS
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
JULY 16, 2009
__________
Serial No. 111-44
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Science and Technology
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.science.house.gov
----------
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
50-745 PDF WASHINGTON : 2010
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
HON. BART GORDON, Tennessee, Chair
JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois RALPH M. HALL, Texas
EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER JR.,
LYNN C. WOOLSEY, California Wisconsin
DAVID WU, Oregon LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas
BRIAN BAIRD, Washington DANA ROHRABACHER, California
BRAD MILLER, North Carolina ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland
DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois VERNON J. EHLERS, Michigan
GABRIELLE GIFFORDS, Arizona FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma
DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois
MARCIA L. FUDGE, Ohio W. TODD AKIN, Missouri
BEN R. LUJAN, New Mexico RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas
PAUL D. TONKO, New York BOB INGLIS, South Carolina
PARKER GRIFFITH, Alabama MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas
STEVEN R. ROTHMAN, New Jersey MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida
JIM MATHESON, Utah BRIAN P. BILBRAY, California
LINCOLN DAVIS, Tennessee ADRIAN SMITH, Nebraska
BEN CHANDLER, Kentucky PAUL C. BROUN, Georgia
RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri PETE OLSON, Texas
BARON P. HILL, Indiana
HARRY E. MITCHELL, Arizona
CHARLES A. WILSON, Ohio
KATHLEEN DAHLKEMPER, Pennsylvania
ALAN GRAYSON, Florida
SUZANNE M. KOSMAS, Florida
GARY C. PETERS, Michigan
VACANCY
------
Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics
HON. GABRIELLE GIFFORDS, Arizona, Chair
DAVID WU, Oregon PETE OLSON, Texas
DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER JR.,
MARCIA L. FUDGE, Ohio Wisconsin
PARKER GRIFFITH, Alabama DANA ROHRABACHER, California
STEVEN R. ROTHMAN, New Jersey FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma
BARON P. HILL, Indiana MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas
CHARLES A. WILSON, Ohio
ALAN GRAYSON, Florida
SUZANNE M. KOSMAS, Florida
BART GORDON, Tennessee RALPH M. HALL, Texas
RICHARD OBERMANN Subcommittee Staff Director
PAM WHITNEY Democratic Professional Staff Member
ALLEN LI Democratic Professional Staff Member
KEN MONROE Republican Professional Staff Member
ED FEDDEMAN Republican Professional Staff Member
DEVIN BRYANT Research Assistant
C O N T E N T S
July 16, 2009
Page
Hearing Charter.................................................. 2
Opening Statements
Statement by Representative Gabrielle Giffords, Chairwoman,
Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics, Committee on Science and
Technology, U.S. House of Representatives...................... 20
Written Statement............................................ 21
Statement by Representative Pete Olson, Ranking Minority Member,
Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics, Committee on Science and
Technology, U.S. House of Representatives...................... 21
Written Statement............................................ 23
Witnesses:
General Lester L. Lyles [U.S. Air Force, Ret.], Chair of the
Committee on the Rationale and Goals of the U.S. Civil Space
Program, Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board, National
Research Council
Oral Statement............................................... 24
Written Statement............................................ 27
Biography.................................................... 31
Ms. Patti Grace Smith, Member of the Board of Directors, The
Space Foundation
Oral Statement............................................... 31
Written Statement............................................ 34
Biography.................................................... 38
Ms. Deborah Adler Myers, General Manager, Science Channel,
Discovery Communications
Oral Statement............................................... 38
Written Statement............................................ 40
Biography.................................................... 43
Mr. Miles O'Brien, Journalist
Oral Statement............................................... 43
Written Statement............................................ 46
Discussion
Improving NASA's Communication With the Public................. 47
How Should NASA Communicate Its Contributions to Society?...... 49
Communicating the Value of the ISS to the Public............... 52
Modernizing Public Relations on the ISS........................ 54
Reducing Mission Risk.......................................... 55
Improving Communication to the Public.......................... 56
Examining NASA Promotion Techniques............................ 57
Will the Private Sector Play a Greater Role in the Future?..... 58
What Should NASA Do Regarding Space Debris?.................... 59
Viable Space-based Business Models............................. 60
Streamlining Viable Aerospace Business Models.................. 61
Improving Outreach to Children................................. 61
Marketing Role Models to the Public............................ 62
Creating a Role Model: Example................................. 63
Telling the Story of Astronaut Diversity....................... 64
A New National Space Council: Advisor or Mission Coordinator?.. 64
Inspiring America's Youth...................................... 65
Rewarding Scientists and Engineers With Competitive Pay........ 66
Matching NASA's Budget With Goals.............................. 68
Appendix: Answers to Post-Hearing Questions
General Lester L. Lyles [U.S. Air Force, Ret.], Chair of the
Committee on the Rationale and Goals of the U.S. Civil Space
Program, Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board, National
Research Council............................................... 72
Ms. Patti Grace Smith, Member of the Board of Directors, The
Space Foundation............................................... 76
Ms. Deborah Adler Myers, General Manager, Science Channel,
Discovery Communications....................................... 78
Mr. Miles O'Brien, Journalist.................................... 81
ENHANCING THE RELEVANCE OF SPACE TO ADDRESS NATIONAL NEEDS
----------
THURSDAY, JULY 16, 2009
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics,
Committee on Science and Technology,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 2:00 p.m., in
Room 2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Gabrielle
Giffords [Chairwoman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
hearing charter
SUBCOMMITTEE ON SPACE AND AERONAUTICS
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Enhancing the Relevance of
Space to Address National Needs
thursday, july 16, 2009
2:00 p.m.-4:00 p.m.
2318 rayburn house office building
I. Purpose
On Thursday, July 16, 2009 the Subcommittee on Space and
Aeronautics will hold a hearing on enhancing the relevance of space
activities to address national needs. The hearing will (1) examine how
recent reports by the National Research Council and The Space
Foundation characterize the relevance of space-related activities,
particularly their role in improving the health, economic well-being,
and the quality of life of all Americans; (2) review what should be
done to maintain and enhance that relevance; and (3) analyze whether
enhanced awareness of the contributions from space-related activities
would result in inspiring future generations of Americans. The hearing
will focus on the following questions and issues:
How relevant is space to addressing important
national needs, and what noteworthy benefits have been achieved
as a result of past space-related investments?
What should be done to maximize the benefits to be
realized from the Nation's space activities and the relevance
of those space activities? How important is it for those
activities to be aligned to national goals and objectives?
How important is the inspirational component of the
Nation's space activities, and what would be the most effective
ways to use space activities to motivate emerging generations
of Americans to pursue studies and careers in science and
engineering?
How well does the public understand the relevance of
the Nation's space activities to meeting national needs and
realizing societal benefits? Is there a need to ``get the
message out'' on the relevance of those space activities and
the benefits to be derived from our space-related investments?
If so, how can that message be most effectively communicated?
The Nation's space program generated considerable
public excitement during the Apollo era. What will it take to
get today's public interested and enthused about the Nation's
space program?
What challenges do communications media face in
attempting to reach the broadest and largest possible audience
while engaging and enlightening them about space? What tools
and strategies are used to address those challenges?
II. Witnesses:
General Lester L. Lyles [U.S. Air Force, retired], Chair of the
Committee on the Rationale and Goals of the U.S. Civil Space Program,
Aeronautics & Space Engineering Board, National Research Council
Ms. Patti Grace Smith, Board of Directors, The Space Foundation
Ms. Debbie Adler Myers, General Manager, Science Channel, Discovery
Communications
Mr. Miles O'Brien, Journalist
III. Overview
Forty years after accomplishing the feat of landing humans on the
Moon's surface, the U.S. civil space program, including its largest
component, the programs of the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA), finds itself at a critical juncture. Key factors
that will influence the future of the U.S. civil space program include:
Upcoming results from an independent review of U.S. human
space flight. The Obama Administration has initiated an independent
review of ``ongoing U.S. human space flight plans and programs, as well
as alternatives, to ensure that the Nation is pursuing the best
trajectory for the future of human space flight--one that is safe,
innovative, affordable, and sustainable.'' Led by Norman Augustine, the
blue-ribbon committee held a public meeting in Washington last month
and has several others planned in the weeks ahead. Results and
supporting analysis are scheduled to be provided in August 2009, in
time to support a decision on the way forward. Until then, NASA is
continuing on a path to complete the International Space Station (ISS)
and retire the Space Shuttle fleet in 2010, develop its next generation
of human space transportation systems, and encourage the development of
commercial space transportation systems capable of bringing cargo to
the ISS.
Direction from a new NASA Administrator. Charles Bolden,
nominated to head NASA, said at his Senate confirmation hearing last
week that he wanted to rekindle the pioneering spirit of the space
agency's early manned space program. His strategy for achieving that
objective will have an impact on the future direction of the Agency.
Future NASA funding levels. Many in Congress have argued that
NASA's budgets have not kept pace with the tasks it has been asked to
carry out. How this mismatch is resolved will have a major impact on
NASA's future.
Competition and cooperation in space. Other nations'
ambitions in space have resulted in significant progress and
accomplishments. China has joined the United States and the former
Soviet Union as the only countries to have launched humans into space.
Europe is considering the feasibility of developing its own human space
flight transportation system, as is India. The once dominant U.S. civil
space program finds itself no longer the only game in town. Moreover,
it is now commonplace for U.S. commercial space interests to find
themselves in vigorous competition with other nations' space companies
in vying for business in a global environment. However, cooperation in
space has long been a significant element of the U.S. civil space
program. In establishing the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration through the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958
(P.L. 85-568, as amended), Congress made clear its intent that the
space program provide benefits to people, that research be utilized,
and that the United States cooperate with other nations in ``the
peaceful application'' of its space activities. Many of today's
societal challenges including climate change, food security, and
availability and access to natural resources and energy supplies are
global in nature. Space assets and cooperation among nations in space
activities are expected to be important in addressing these global
societal issues. The future scope of international cooperation on space
activities will likely shape the direction of the civil space program
here in the U.S.
Relevance of space to the public. While NASA remains
generally popular with the public according to various polls, concern
has been raised about public understanding of what the Agency is doing
and how space research and developments help improve our lives. At
present, Americans and society at large use multiple services and
technologies that were developed, initially, within the context of the
U.S. space program. For example, communications satellites, space-based
weather monitoring and prediction, and precision navigation and timing
emerged from the Nation's investments in space; today these assets are
critical to our basic infrastructure. Space technologies have also
enabled improved medical imaging, telemedicine, and disease tracking,
among multiple other applications. NASA has documented many of the
technologies, products and services derived from investments in the
space program in its annual NASA Spinoffs publications (http://
www.nasa.gov/offices/ipp/home/index.html). In addition, the Agency has
developed a tool called NASA City that allows users to trace the impact
of space on their daily lives (www.nasa.gov/city). Yet, although the
applications of space research and development are infused in the
everyday life of Americans, there is a perception that the public lacks
awareness of how space affects their lives, which can contribute to a
lack of enthusiasm for space program investments.
Replenishing a skilled workforce for continued leadership in
space activities. The perceived lack of excitement may influence the
maintenance of a skilled future civil space workforce. A February 2003
article by the Wall Street Journal stated:
``Many young people today with a technical bent are more
entranced with the Internet or biotechnology than space
exploration. Space travel, after all, was a fascination of
their parents' generation.''
The National Research Council recently examined the relationship
between the U.S. space program and societal and national needs and
priorities and how U.S. leadership can be maintained. Key elements of
that report are described in the following section. In addition, space
advocacy groups have identified the benefits of space to society and
have documented, for example, the contributions of space to the
national and global economy. The Space Report 2009, published by the
Space Foundation, which is summarized in this hearing charter, is one
example. These and many other organizations have also emphasized the
importance of space in inspiring the next generation to excel in
science, technology, engineering and mathematics and in ushering in a
steady pipeline of professionals to replenish an aging aerospace
workforce. Communications and media organizations confront the
challenge of how best to engage individuals by using science content
related to space. Perspectives from such organizations and individuals
can provide insight into some of the approaches that have been taken to
effectively communicate the excitement of space to the public.
IV. Background
National Research Council's Report on America's Future In Space:
Aligning the Civil Space Program with National Needs
The National Academies' National Research Council (NRC) recently
released a report that recommended a series of measures to better align
the civil space program with national needs. The report's overall
conclusion is ``that a preeminent U.S. civil space program with
strengths and capabilities aligned for tackling widely acknowledged
national challenges--environmental, economic, and strategic--will
continue to make major contributions to the Nation's welfare.'' The
impetus for the NRC's chartering a review was its recognition of a
changing national and international context for space activities. The
U.S. space program, initially driven by competition with the former
Soviet Union, now finds that many nations have established, or are
aspiring to develop, independent space capabilities. Developments over
the past 50 years have led to an explosion of scientific and
engineering knowledge and practical applications of space technology.
Space activities now play critical roles in commerce, government, and
science. Furthermore, the private sector has become a significant
factor in the expansion of space-related products and services.
In light of this changing context, the NRC established the
Committee on the Rationale and Goals of the U.S. Civil Space Program
and charged it to prepare a report to advise the Nation on key goals
and critical issues in 21st century U.S. civil space policy. The
committee's report, prepared under the oversight of both the NRC's
Space Studies Board and Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board, is
entitled ``America's Future In Space: Aligning The Civil Space Program
With National Needs.''
In its initial discussions, the committee concluded that debates
about the direction of the civil space program often focused on
addressing near-term problems and issues ``without first putting those
issues in the context of how a disciplined space program can serve
larger national imperatives. In the committee's view, characterizing
the top-level goals of the civil space program and the connection
between those goals and broad national priorities is necessary as a
foundation on which the Nation (both now and in the future) can devise
sustainable solutions to nearer-term issues.''
Consequently, the committee chose to focus on the long-term,
strategic value of the U.S. civil space program. In responding to its
charge, the committee ``sought to provide a long-term, strategic
perspective that frames a vision for civil space activities that can
endure for many years.'' According to the report, the committee's
thinking was informed by the following national priorities:
``Ensuring national security,
Providing clean and affordable energy,
Protecting the environment now and for future
generations,
Educating an engaged citizenry and a capable
workforce for the 21st century,
Sustaining global economic competitiveness, and
Working internationally to build a safer, more
sustainable world.''
The report added that ``A common element across all these urgent
priorities is the significant part that research and development can
play in solving problems and advancing the national enterprise in each
area.'' The importance of space-related activities to generating
interest in science was not lost on the committee. The report noted:
``The high visibility of space activities attracts students'
attention to science, technology, and mathematics, and space
activities are an exciting focus for teaching those subjects.
Commercial space-related ventures now figure significantly in
global economic competitiveness, and, while government
investments to stimulate the Nation's fragile economy will have
short-term impacts, R&D investments can be counted on to make
longer-term sustainable contributions to the Nation's economic
strength. As has countless times proved the case, research in
and from space will continue to lead to important future, and
not always currently predictable, benefits that hold the
promise of progress toward realizing U.S. as well as shared
international goals.''
The committee believed that to be a strategic leader in a
globalized world, the United States needed ``a civil space program
whose breadth, competence, and level of accomplishment ensures that
U.S. leadership is demonstrated, accepted, and welcomed.''
Consequently, the committee identified six strategic goals that it
regarded as basic for guiding program choices and resources planning
for U.S. civil space activities. The goals identified in the
committee's report are:
``To re-establish leadership for the protection of
Earth and its inhabitants through the use of space research and
technology. The key global perspective enabled by space
observations is critical to monitoring climate change and
testing climate models, managing Earth resources, and
mitigating risks associated with natural phenomena such as
severe weather and asteroids.
To sustain U.S. leadership in science by seeking
knowledge of the universe and searching for life beyond Earth.
Space offers a multitude of critical opportunities, unavailable
in Earth-based laboratories, to extend our knowledge of the
local and distant universe and to search for life beyond Earth.
To expand the frontiers of human activities in space.
Human space flight continues to challenge technology, utilize
unique human capabilities, bring global prestige, and excite
the public's imagination. Space provides almost limitless
opportunities for extending the human experience to new
frontiers.
To provide technological, economic, and societal
benefits that contribute solutions to the Nation's most
pressing problems. Space activities provide economic
opportunities, stimulate innovation, and support services that
improve the quality of life. U.S. economic competitiveness is
directly affected by our ability to perform in this sector and
the many sectors enabled and supported by space activities.
To inspire current and future generations. U.S. civil
space activities, built on a legacy of spectacular
achievements, should continue to inspire the public and also
serve to attract future generations of scientists and
engineers.
To enhance U.S. global strategic leadership through
leadership in civil space activities. Because of the growing
strategic importance of space, all nations that aspire to
global political and economic leadership in the 21st century
are increasing their space-faring capabilities. Continued U.S.
global leadership is tied to continued U.S. leadership in
space.''
To contribute to realizing these national objectives, the committee
identified four foundational elements it viewed as ``critical to a
purposeful, effective, strategic U.S. space program, without which U.S.
space efforts will lack robustness, realism, sustainability, and
affordability.'' These are:
1. ``Coordinated national strategies--implementing national space
policy coherently across all civilian agencies in support of national
needs and priorities and aligning attention to shared interests of
civil and national security space activities.
2. A competent technical workforce--sufficient in size, talent, and
experience to address difficult and pressing challenges.
3. An effectively sized and structured infrastructure--realizing
synergy from the public and private sectors and from international
partnerships.
4. A priority investment in technology and innovation--strengthening
and sustaining the U.S. capacity to meet national needs through
transformational advances.''
``The committee found that, in spite of their promise and utility,
components of the civil space program are not always aligned to fully
capitalize on opportunities to serve the larger national interest.
Decisions about civil space priorities, strategies, and programs, and
the resources to achieve them are not always made with a conscious view
toward their linkages to broader national interests.'' The committee
made seven recommendations:
1. ``Addressing national imperatives. Emphasis should be placed on
aligning space program capabilities with current high-priority national
imperatives, including those where space is not traditionally
considered. The U.S. civil space program has long demonstrated a
capacity to effectively serve U.S. national interests.''
2. ``Climate and environmental monitoring. NASA and NOAA should lead
the formation of an international satellite-observing architecture
capable of monitoring global climate change and its consequences and
support the research needed to interpret and understand the data in
time for meaningful policy decisions.''
3. ``Scientific inquiry. NASA, in cooperation with other agencies and
international partners, should continue to lead a program of scientific
exploration and discovery.''
4. ``Advanced space technology. NASA should revitalize its advanced
technology development program by establishing a DARPA-like
organization within NASA as a priority mission area to support
preeminent civil, national security (if dual-use), and commercial space
programs.''
5. ``International cooperation. The government, under White House
leadership, should pursue international cooperation in space
proactively as a means to advance U.S. strategic leadership and meet
national and mutual international goals.''
6. ``Human space flight. NASA should be on the leading edge of
actively pursuing human space flight, to extend the human experience
into new frontiers, challenge technology, bring global prestige, and
excite the public's imagination.''
7. ``Organizing to meet national challenges. The President of the
United States should task senior executive-branch officials to align
agency and department strategies; identify gaps or shortfalls in policy
coverage, policy implementation, and in resource allocation; and
identify new opportunities for space-based endeavors that will help to
address critical issues now confronting the United States and, to a
considerable extent, the world as well.''
In the course of this report, several points were made that are
relevant to the work of the Subcommittee:
There is no single rationale for a U.S. civil space program:
``The committee's view is that there is no single rationale for the
U.S. civil space program, but rather that, as a significant component
of the Nation's R&D enterprise, the U.S. civil space program should be
structured and supported to fulfill multiple responsibilities to assist
the Nation in achieving its goals of exerting strategic leadership and
improving the well-being of people. The U.S. civil space program should
be preeminent in the sense that it can influence, by example, how
nations take advantage of the opportunities afforded by space. For the
United States to be a strategic leader, its civil space program must
demonstrate breadth, competence, and a record of accomplishment so that
U.S. leadership is accepted and welcomed.''
There is unavoidable risk in human activity in space:
``Humans have proven effective in carrying out a variety of important
roles as engineers and scientists in space. It is reasonable to expect
that, in this century, humans will again surpass previous limits and
will visit asteroids, travel to the moons of Mars, and establish a
martian base similar in scale to those in Antarctica. In the
committee's view, the leadership and inspiration achieved by expanding
the frontiers of human space flight are worth the dangers faced in such
exploration; lesser objectives may not be worth the same risk.''
By pursuing the goal of inspiring, the space program will
create other benefits. Through pursuit of such a goal, the report said
that the space program will:
``Instill a sense of interest, excitement, and
optimism about opportunities for scientific and technological
advancements to enhance the well-being of the Nation,
Attract and encourage members of the next generation
of the Nation's technical workforce, and
Create a new generation who can draw on the
advantages offered by space to help solve problems on Earth,
and ensure U.S. leadership, building on the solid achievements
of the past 50 years of U.S. investments in space.''
Civil space activities provide an important stimulus for the
next generation to pursue careers in science, technology, engineering,
and mathematics. ``The NASA Authorization Act of 2008 states that
``NASA, through its pursuit of challenging and relevant activities, can
provide an important stimulus to the next generation to pursue careers
in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.'' While specific
to NASA, this statement applies to all aspects of the U.S. civil space
program. Furthermore, a reputation for competence in executing space
missions that advance the frontier is likely to help attract talented
foreign nationals to study and work in the United States as well as to
inspire our own students to enter technical fields.''
A vigorous space program generates optimism. ``Civil space
activities also can exert an influence in building citizens' confidence
in a brighter future. We live in a world with many immediate concerns--
notably including a weakened world economy, regional conflicts and
global terrorism, and threats of the consequences of climate change and
limitations in energy sources. It is a time when people can be fearful
that our tomorrows will be less promising than our past; that our
children will have fewer opportunities than we enjoyed.
Surely, a vigorous civil space program will be a strong signal that
our future as a nation is promising, that life can be better, that our
prospects are boundless. Civil space assets, with their global
perspective on the changing Earth, can provide knowledge to enable wise
stewardship of our planet's bounty. We can become a true space-faring
society with new opportunities for our economy. Civil space activities
will add to knowledge of our place in the cosmos and thereby expand the
cultural richness of our nation.
The United States, leading by example and in cooperation with others
in the exploration and utilization of space, can be a strategic leader
in the world, not to be feared or despised, but rather to be valued for
its concerted attention to basic challenges facing people worldwide.''
Matching responsibilities to resources does not currently
exist today. ``A coordinated, sustainable set of strategies should
ensure that responsibilities are realistically matched to available
resources. Such a match does not exist today. For example, NASA has a
central role in civil space, yet by any reasonable measure it is
inadequately funded to pursue its many responsibilities. NASA now
follows the U.S. space exploration policy established in 2004 by then
President George W. Bush but must implement that policy within the
budget constraints imposed by the Administration and Congress. The
committee concurs with the primary conclusion of a 2006 NRC report,
which summarized the situation by saying, ``NASA is being asked to
accomplish too much with too little. The agency does not have the
necessary resources to carry out the tasks of completing the
International Space Station, returning humans to the Moon, maintaining
vigorous space and Earth science and microgravity life and physical
sciences programs, and sustaining capabilities in aeronautical
research.'' Rather than requiring that a broad and ambitious program be
fit into an arbitrarily constrained budget as has been the case in
recent years, a sustainable strategy would first define the program
that the Nation is committed to undertake and then realistically define
the resources that are required to accomplish that program.''
Budget levels need to recognize space programs' connection to
the Nation's most prominent problems. ``The budgetary situations faced
by NASA and NOAA [National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration] are
a consequence of a trend in recent administrations to view the space
program as an isolated stovepipe, with little or no connection to the
Nation's most prominent problems. Civil space programs have largely
been assigned budget levels that are incrementally based on previous
years' budgets, with only tenuous connections to the evolution of the
programs or their capabilities. An effective process would connect
space policy to broader national needs, and then consider the necessary
resources and implementation, improve efficiency by considering
interdependencies and broad system effects, enhance productivity by
providing focus and a longer-term view, and encourage a culture of
collaboration among government agencies, the private sector (including
both industry and academia), and international partners. This process
would then provide a necessary foundation for continuing U.S. space
leadership.''
General Lester Lyles, Chair of the Committee on the Rationale and
Goals of the U.S. Civil Space Program, will be a witness at the hearing
and can provide further details on the committee's work. The Executive
Summary of the committee's report is included in Attachment I.
The Space Foundation's ``The Space Report 2009''
In chronicling the previous year in space along with an outlook on
what lies ahead, the Space Foundation's The Space Report 2009, released
in April 2009, establishes the relevance of space by detailing the
overall space economy; space products and services; space
infrastructure; and economic impacts, workforce, and education. The
report states that, ``in a troubled financial environment, the space
industry managed to maintain and increase its revenues in 2008, with
estimated budgets and revenues from public and private sources of $257
billion. Total revenue for space products and services in 2008 reached
an estimated $91 billion, 10.4 percent more than the $82.4 billion
total in 2007.''
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Of particular interest to this hearing is how The Space Report 2009
treats space products and services. The report notes that:
``The space industry has passed the point where all the ways
in which space products and services are used can be described
within the covers of a single publication. The examples in this
report represent a small sampling to illustrate the breadth and
ingenuity of the space industry in creating new ways to serve
governments and the private sector. From private space travel
to mobile Internet services to high-tech swimsuits, the space
industry is fully engaged in finding new applications for
existing technology and in developing new technologies to solve
persistent problems. Common themes around some of these
products and services involve making life easier and more
interesting. In 2008, ICO Global Communications began testing a
mobile TV service using a satellite over the United States
designed to deliver up to 15 television channels for
entertainment starting in 2010. Fishermen around the world are
using satellite maps that report sea surface data to help guide
them to profitable fishing grounds. The world watched U.S.
Olympian Michael Phelps swim into the record books at the
Beijing games. Less well known is the fact that Phelps and
other Olympic swimmers were breaking records with the help of
swim wear developed as a result of a technology spinoff from
atmospheric drag research conducted for the Space Shuttle
program.''
In comments regarding how pervasive and integral space products,
services, and spinoffs have become, the report states:
``Space products and services and their related space
technology spinoffs have become part of the fabric of daily
life in ways that people increasingly take for granted, and
often in ways that do not even bring space to mind.'' The
report provides a table listing examples of such technology
spinoffs:
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The report also provides examples of how space products and
services have contributed to improving health care. In describing one
such example, the report stated:
``A collaborative effort between NASA and the University of
Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) involves using satellite imagery to
study and combat disease. Although this type of collaboration
has occurred before, the new effort aims to formalize a
training program. In 2008 a laboratory was set up to train
public health students to use remote sensing for medical and
public health applications. The students take courses both from
NASA remote sensing scientists and UAB professors. Studies in
the lab have been conducted on fighting malaria and the West
Nile virus. Using infrared imagery from satellites, scientists
can locate warm standing water, a breeding ground for disease-
carrying mosquitoes. Satellites also collect data on pollution
levels and other environmental factors in areas with high
populations of asthma sufferers to determine the factors that
might be causing asthma attacks.''
In examining workforce issues, the report notes that:
``The highly visible rockets, satellites, telescopes, and
other hardware that embody space exploration obscure the fact
that these endeavors ultimately depend on skilled people.
Scientists, engineers, astronomers, technicians, and
administrators represent the true backbone of the space
industry and are its most precious resource. The Space Report
2009 explores the talent pool needed to keep the space industry
thriving. It describes the positive economic impact of space
industry activity in states and metropolitan areas, and
identifies a critical area of concern in the need to educate
and train the next generation of U.S. space professionals.
According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the U.S.
space industry employs more than 262,000 men and women in 41
states including the District of Columbia. Between 2003 and
2007, the U.S. space industry sector added approximately 12,000
jobs at pay scales far above national averages. In just the
commercial space transportation sector, the direct valuation
according to the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration is $23
billion, and $139 billion when secondary and tertiary
industries are included. This value exceeds one percent of the
country's gross domestic product.''
But keeping a flow of trained workers in the future will be a
challenge. The report states:
``It is axiomatic that securing a skilled and technically
trained workforce is critical to sustaining and growing the
U.S. space industrial base. There is deepening concern that the
young people who will make up the workforce required for the
U.S. space industry to prosper into the future are not
receiving the basic education they need in science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. A long educational
pipeline is required to develop these skills, beginning in
elementary school and continuing through secondary and higher
education. Science and technology levels in the United States,
from kindergarten through the 12th grade (K-12) and at the
post-secondary level, place the Nation at a disadvantage
relative to other countries. The most recent data shows that
American students are slipping behind their international
counterparts in math and science education. This situation is
exacerbated as other nations such as China have become more
aggressive in developing their indigenous technical talent
base. These worrisome indicators point to a need for the U.S.
space industry to intensify its advocacy for the highly
educated and technically trained workforce that enables it to
thrive.
The success of space-related activity depends upon workers
with great technical expertise, from astronauts and aerospace
engineers to space scientists. The U.S. Bureau of Labor
Statistics (BLS) occupational outlook projections show that
demand will be high during the next ten years for workers in
key space occupations as the needs and demands of the space
industry grow. For instance, the BLS projections confirm that
total employment levels for aerospace engineers will be 10
percent greater in 2016 than the 2006 employment level. The
number of advanced degrees awarded in the United States for
space-related fields of study has been on the rise for years.
However, virtually all of this growth can be attributed to an
increasing percentage of foreign graduate students in these
subjects.''
In examining the state of science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics education in the United States, the report provides some
sobering and worrisome statistics about the Nation's ability to address
future workforce challenges:
``The results of this examination confirm prevailing concerns
about shortages in the ranks of aerospace engineers as the
scientists and technicians who began their careers during the
era of the Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo programs reach
retirement. According to U.S. Government estimates, the
employment levels for aerospace engineers needed to sustain
anticipated activity will be 10 percent greater in 2016 than a
decade earlier.
Meanwhile, results of proficiency testing in science and
mathematics show reason for serious concern about low
achievement levels in U.S. elementary and secondary schools, as
the report details. Only 29 percent of the Nation's 4th graders
rated proficient in science; 39 percent in math. In a
comparison of 36 nations, U.S. 4th graders ranked 11th in math
achievement and 8th in science achievement. The nations
outperforming the United States in these subjects include
several that are pursuing ambitious space programs. Among 12th
graders, only 18 percent achieved proficiency in science; 23
percent in math. In the physical sciences, more than 93 percent
of middle school students are taught by teachers who are not
certified or did not major in those fields.
The worrisome trends in U.S. science and math education extend
to the college level. Between 1986 and 2006, Bachelor's degrees
awarded in Earth and atmospheric sciences, engineering, math,
and computer science fell eight percent. Graduate level degrees
have increased significantly at both the Master's and doctoral
levels, but that is due in part to the large number of foreign
students studying in the United States. Immigration policies
are making it harder for such students to come to the United
States and study, and to stay once they graduate.
Engineering Bachelor's degrees have declined by 11 percent in
the United States over the past two decades. The percentage of
undergraduate degrees in science and engineering has also
dropped considerably in the past 20 years. Engineering degrees
comprised only five percent of all Bachelor's degrees awarded
in 2006, down from eight percent two decades earlier.
In addition to improving the quality of math and science
education in secondary schools, the space profession has
recognized the need to recruit more women into the field. While
women represent a majority of the students who received
Bachelor's degrees in 2006, only one in five of the degrees in
engineering were awarded to women that year. Female
representation in the aeronautical and astronautical
engineering fields has increased, but has a long way to go to
reach parity.
Unless the current declining trend of space-critical degrees
is reversed, many of these new jobs may go unfilled, opening
the door to increasing competition from other countries for a
field the United States has dominated for two generations.''
In projecting its outlook for the future, The Space Report 2009
states:
``The picture of space activity that emerges in The Space
Report 2009 is one of continued innovation and risk-taking in
the private sector, and ambitious exploration and international
cooperation in the public sector. So far, the clearest visible
impact of the global economic downturn on the space industry is
in the equity markets, where space industries collectively
sustained deeper valuation losses than broader market indexes.
The raw numbers concerning space activity in 2008--employment,
payroll, output, manufacturing, and launches--generally showed
continued steady growth. There may be a lag time before a
downturn in some of these measures of the space industry
becomes apparent. If historic trends are indicative, the full
impact of the economic slowdown on the commercial space
industry may not be visible until 2009 or 2010 due to the
numerous corporate growth program commitments and the
consistently strong cash flows produced by the industry.''
``Space activity has integrated itself so thoroughly into
broader business activity, with an array of services vital to
communication, travel, broadcast, and other industries, that
the space industry is now part of the mainstream economy. It
continues to demonstrate the potential for growth, expanding
its breadth and volume of activity, and growing new business
arenas in which the space industry is, or has become, a key
player.''
Ms. Patti Grace Smith, a Member of the Board of Directors of The
Space Foundation, will be a witness at the hearing and can provide
further details on the Foundation's report.
Surveys and Polls of Public Views on Space
The National Academies and Space Foundation reports documented the
importance of space to our national needs and the myriad ways in which
space benefits our lives and society at large. However, the extent to
which the public is aware of those benefits appears to be limited. In
recent years, NASA and other non-governmental entities have sponsored
national surveys and public opinion polls to acquire feedback on how
the public views NASA and the Nation's space program. One of those
surveys, which was conducted for a NASA Strategic Communications
Implementation Framework, showed that public perception about the
relevance of space changed after individuals were informed of examples
of how space affects their lives.
Gallup Polls
Since 1990, Gallup has conducted polls to ascertain public
attitudes about the job NASA is doing and public spending on space.
According to Gallup, ``the public has generally rated NASA
positively.'' The two most recent Gallup polls were conducted in 2006
and 2007. The 2007 poll results were based on telephone interviews with
1010 adults (18 years of age or older).
An October 31, 2007 article on Gallup's web site, ``Americans
Continue to Rate NASA Positively,'' on the results of the Gallup poll
states: ``According to the Sept. 14-16 poll [2007], 56 percent of
Americans rate the job NASA is doing in positive terms, with 16 percent
saying it is doing an `excellent' job and 40 percent a `good' job.
Meanwhile, just eight percent say it is doing a poor job, with most of
the rest describing NASA's performance as `only fair'.''
Gallup has asked the same question--``How would you rate the job
being done by NASA--the U.S. space agency? Would you say it is doing an
excellent, good, only fair, or poor job?'' since 1990. According to the
2007 article, ``NASA has had less-than-majority positive evaluations
just twice since 1990, when Gallup first asked this question. The
initial 46 percent rating in July 1990 came shortly after a flaw in the
Hubble telescope was discovered. Gallup measured the historical low
rating of 43 percent in September 1993 after a series of mishaps, which
included the loss of contact with the Mars Orbiter and a couple of
last-second decisions to scrub planned Space Shuttle missions.'' In
addition, the 2007 article notes that ``The high point in NASA's
ratings came in November 1998, shortly after Sen. John Glenn--one of
the earliest U.S. astronauts--made a much-heralded return trip to
space.''
Public Views of Space Exploration: An Independent National
Survey
In February 2009, The Everett Group, conducted an independent
national survey to:
``Gauge Americans' impressions of the space program relative
to other national institutions
Determine what the public perceives to be the greatest
benefits of the space program
Gauge the level of public support for an increase in funding
for the space program
Identify future missions that the public would support.''
The survey included a random sample of 360 U.S. adults.
In response to the question, ``How would you describe your overall
interest in the U.S. space program?'', the participants answered: very
interested (15 percent), somewhat interested (44 percent), not too
interested (22 percent), and not at all interested (19 percent).''
In response to the question, ``Can you think of any ways that your
life has been improved directly by the U.S. space program?'', ``Half of
the public says `Yes' and can name one or more ways the space program
improved their life.'' ``The other half says `No' and believes that the
program has not improved their life in any way.'' Of those that
answered that space improved their lives and provided an example,
``satellites, knowledge about the universe, and new technology'' were
the three most common examples cited. Other responses included
``computers, Velcro, foods, cell phones, plastics, knowledge about
weather/environment, microwaves, medical advances, communications,
clothes/fabrics, educating young scientists, and entertainment/
pictures.''
The write-up of the survey lists ``Key Take-Aways'' as:
``Most Americans are interested in the space program (60
percent) but an alarming number have no interest at all (19
percent). Interest is particularly soft among women.
On the positive side, large majorities feel that the space
program is important to national security (71 percent),
contributes to national pride (79 percent), and inspires young
people to study math and science (82 percent).
Half of the public feel that the space program has not
directly improved their lives in any way. Those who do,
however, cite technological developments and knowledge about
the universe.
Most believe that the U.S. continues to explore space in
order to maintain our status as an international leader or
because it is human nature to explore.
The majority of Americans (60 percent) reject the idea that
the space program is a waste of taxpayer money. They are not
convinced, however, that more funding is needed.
A plurality feel that a manned mission to Mars should be the
next major mission, but there is some sentiment that this
should not be pursued during the current economic recession.
Many Americans would prefer to see the space program's
resources used to help solve terrestrial problems rather than
extraterrestrial ones for the time being.''
NASA Strategic Communications Framework Implementation Plan
In 2007, NASA's Office of Strategic Communications developed an
Implementation Plan with the purpose of putting ``forward specific
messages and initiatives based on the Strategic Communications
Framework and recent round of market research and analysis.'' According
to the Plan, the overall Agency communications goals were:
1. ``Build greater public support for NASA's mission and activities.
Authority for effort based in:
Space Act of 1958
2005 NASA Authorization Act
2. Make Agency communications more participatory
Increase users of MyNASA, Inside NASA, and
communications.nasa.gov
3. Change communications behavior within the Agency
Reach out to new audiences
Demonstrate relevancy and benefits to key
audiences.''
The report states that ``Messages and outreach activities are
informed by relevant policy guidance: Vision for Space Exploration,
National Space Policy, National Aeronautics Research and Development
Policy.''
On the analysis of market research, the report provides a NASA
Brand Balance Sheet:
``Strengths
1. Near Universal Awareness
2. Enormous Public Appreciation
3. High Support
4. Wide Appeal
Challenges
1. Little Specific Knowledge
2. Lack of Relevance
3. Low Excitement
4. Disconnect from Activities
5. Lack of Current Context''
The report recommends that NASA communications should:
``Demonstrate NASA's role using message components:
Science
Economic
Security
Leadership
Illustrate NASA's relevance by highlighting
The importance of space to America's economy
The benefits to people that exist because of technology
developed by NASA
Engage and inspire audiences about the future benefits of
NASA and its leadership in space exploration, aeronautics research,
science, and education.''
In developing the 2007 Strategic Communications Framework
Implementation Plan, NASA commissioned independent entities to conduct
market research (focus groups and a survey) to:
``Set benchmarks in areas of knowledge, relevance, and
excitement
Testing of key words and messages
Development of messages around Space
Exploration including Moon/Mars missions
Effects of specific benefits in terms of illustrating
relevance
Gain insight into demographic differences.''
The summary of market research results is as follows:
``NASA's overall public image remains high and a
large number of Americans believe continuing space exploration
is important
However, fewer Americans rate NASA as relevant to
their daily lives and perceptions of NASA's economic
contribution vary
Telling people about specific NASA-related
technologies has a tremendous impact on both relevance and
economic measures
Among messages tested, there were no ``weak'' reasons
for continuing space exploration, though some reasons were
stronger than others
When talking about NASA programs and activities,
framing NASA communications in terms of relevance and benefits
is most effective.''
The report identifies outreach strategies [as of 2007] including
the 50th Anniversary of NASA, NASA Future Forums (conferences to
discuss how innovation helps promote and sustain economic development),
NASA Lecture Series, the use of Shuttle launches to engage State and
local leaders, public service announcements, strategic alliances, and
the use of new media that takes advantage of customized and
personalized web pages and opportunities for online interaction
(MyNASA), as well as an upgrade of the NASA web site and an online
catalog of NASA benefits and stories provided by individuals on how
space affects their lives.
Social Networking and Other Forms of Communications and Outreach
As noted in the above sections on public awareness and strategic
communications, many Americans are unaware of how space affects and
benefits their lives. Enhancing the public's awareness involves
communication and information dissemination, including by means of new
communication modes and tools that are widely used by younger
generations. As stated in a March 2009 article in Discovery News, ``Ask
most folks around NASA what lured them into the space business and
they'll tell you about how shivers ran down their spines watching Neil
Armstrong step onto the moon in 1969. That's a problem for an agency
that exists to inspire the young and explore the unknown.''
One of the ways that NASA is attempting to address this issue is
through the use of social networking. According to the Webcontent.gov
information on Social Networks and Government, social networking tools
are ``web sites that connect people'' and involve ``online
communities'' that people can join without cost and create a web page
with their profile. These sites ``allow users to find people they know
among the members, or look for other members with similar interests or
affiliations.'' NASA is employing these tools as another means of
communicating with the interested public, especially with younger
people who are active users of social networking sites. The Mars
Phoenix Lander mission has tens of thousands of Twitter followers. NASA
astronaut Jose Hernandez used Twitter to relay insights in both English
and Spanish on his Shuttle mission training. NASA is on Facebook and
also disseminates video using YouTube.
NASA is also using naming and voting contests as another means to
engage the public in its programs. A contest on what to name a new node
of the International Space Station attracted considerable attention
when participants voted to name it after comedian Stephen Colbert.
(NASA elected to name the new ISS node, ``Tranquility,'' but named a
new treadmill, the Combined Operational Load Bearing External
Resistance Treadmill (COLBERT) after the comedian.) Another contest
allowed participants to vote, for example, on an observing target for
the Hubble Space Telescope.
In addition, NASA has upgraded its web site to incorporate other
tools that invite public participation in NASA activities. One example
is a web page entitled ``Collaborate and Connect with NASA'' that
provides links to Twitter, Facebook, USTREAMTV, myspace, YouTube, and
flickr and provides multiple links that provide opportunities to
collaborate with NASA. The Collaborate and Connect with NASA web page
also provides links that outline how readers can help identify
landforms in satellite images of Mars, one that has offered contests
for artwork on the lunar environment, and a site that provides teacher
lesson plans, access to Earth science data, and opportunities to
participate in citizen science projects relevant to Earth science,
among other means to engage with NASA activities.
ATTACHMENT I
Executive Summary of the Report
America's Future In Space: Aligning the Civil Space Program with
National Needs
From its inception in 1958, much of the U.S. space program was
driven by opportunities to serve national interests in a geopolitical
environment heavily colored by Cold War threats and fears. Originally,
the true potential of space activities was largely speculative. In the
ensuing decades, however, early expectations for discovery and
technological accomplishment have been richly exceeded. Without a
doubt, the first 50 years of the space age have been transformative.
Astronauts have stood on Earth's Moon while millions watched.
Commercial communications and remote sensing satellites have become
part of the basic infrastructure of the world. Satellites support
worldwide communications, providing a critical backbone for daily
commerce--carrying billions of global financial transactions daily, for
example. Direct broadcasting beams television signals into homes
globally, delivering images that bring unprecedented awareness of
events occurring throughout the world. Military global positioning
satellites provide ubiquitous signals that support a stunning variety
of services, from assisting in the navigation of civilian airplanes,
shipping, and automobiles to transmitting timing signals that enable
cell phone and power grid switching. Remote sensing satellites obtain
high-resolution images of Earth's surface, available now on the
Internet for people worldwide to view and use, and provide critical
information to monitor changes in our climate and their effects.
Our understanding of every aspect of the cosmos has been profoundly
altered, and in the view of many, we stand once again at the brink of a
new era. Space observations have mapped the remnant radiation from the
Big Bang that began our universe. We have discovered that the expansion
of the universe continues to accelerate, driven by a force that we do
not yet understand, and that there are large amounts of matter in the
universe that we cannot yet observe. We have seen galaxies forming at
the beginning of the universe and stars forming in our own galaxy. We
have explored the wonders that abound in our solar system and have
found locations where life might have occurred or might even now be
present. We have discovered planets around other stars, so many that it
is ever more likely that there are other Earths comparable to our own.
What will the next 50 years bring? Today we live in a globalized
world of societies and nations characterized by intertwined economies,
trade commitments, and international security agreements. Mutual
dependencies are much more pervasive and important than ever before.
Many of the pressing problems that now require our best efforts to
understand and resolve--from terrorism to climate change to demand for
energy--are also global in nature and must be addressed through mutual
worldwide action. In the judgment of the Committee on the Rationale and
Goals of the U.S. Civil Space Program, the ability to operate from,
through, and in space will be a key component of potential solutions to
21st century challenges. As it has before, with the necessary alignment
to achieve clearly articulated national priorities, the U.S. civil
space\1\ program can serve the Nation effectively in this new and
demanding environment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The committee considered ``civil space'' to include all
government, commercial, academic, and private space activities not
directly intended for military or intelligence use.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its initial discussions, the committee concluded that debates
about the direction of the civil space program have too often focused
on addressing near-term problems and issues without first putting those
issues in the context of how a disciplined space program can serve
larger national imperatives. In the committee's view, characterizing
the top-level goals of the civil space program and the connection
between those goals and broad national priorities is necessary as a
foundation on which the Nation (both now and in the future) can devise
sustainable solutions to nearer-term issues. Therefore, the committee
focused on the long-term, strategic value of the U.S. civil space
program, and its report does not address nearer-term issues that affect
the conduct of U.S. space activities other than to provide a context in
which more tactical decisions might be made.
The national priorities that informed the committee's thinking
include ensuring national security, providing clean and affordable
energy, protecting the environment now and for future generations,
educating an engaged citizenry and a capable workforce for the 21st
century, sustaining global economic competitiveness, and working
internationally to build a safer, more sustainable world. A common
element across all these urgent priorities is the significant part that
research and development can play in solving problems and advancing the
national enterprise in each area. Instruments in space have documented
an accelerating decline in arctic sea ice, mapped the circulation of
the world's oceans, enabled the creation of quantitative three-
dimensional data sets to improve the quality of hurricane forecasting,
and created new tools to address a host of agricultural, coastal, and
urban resource management problems, to cite only a few examples. Such
capabilities demonstrate what can be achieved when technologically
challenging space problems stimulate innovation that leads to long-term
advances with applications beyond the space sector. Civil space
activities are central to the R&D enterprise of the Nation, often in a
transformational way, and thus present powerful opportunities to help
address major national objectives.
Observations from space offering unique capabilities for global
environmental and land-use monitoring are essential to informed
decision-making about energy production and climate change policies,
and they help provide the understanding required for wise management.
The high visibility of space activities attracts students' attention to
science, technology, and mathematics, and space activities are an
exciting focus for teaching those subjects. Commercial space-related
ventures now figure significantly in global economic competitiveness,
and, while government investments to stimulate the Nation's fragile
economy will have short-term impacts, R&D investments can be counted on
to make longer-term sustainable contributions to the Nation's economic
strength. As has countless times proved the case, research in and from
space will continue to lead to important future, and not always
currently predictable, benefits that hold the promise of progress
toward realizing U.S. as well as shared international goals.
The committee's overall conclusion is that a preeminent U.S. civil
space program with strengths and capabilities aligned for tackling
widely acknowledged national challenges--environmental, economic, and
strategic--will continue to make major contributions to the Nation's
welfare.
GOALS FOR THE CIVIL SPACE PROGRAM
Structured and supported to match multiple responsibilities in
serving key national objectives, the U.S. civil space program should be
preeminent in the sense that it can influence, by example, nations' use
of space. To be a strategic leader in a globalized world requires that
the United States have a civil space program whose breadth, competence,
and level of accomplishment ensures that U.S. leadership is
demonstrated, accepted, and welcomed.
The committee identified six strategic goals that it regards as
basic for guiding program choices and resources planning for U.S. civil
space activities. The goals all serve the national interest, and steady
progress in achieving each of them is necessary.
To re-establish leadership for the protection of
Earth and its inhabitants through the use of space research and
technology. The key global perspective enabled by space
observations is critical to monitoring climate change and
testing climate models, managing Earth resources, and
mitigating risks associated with natural phenomena such as
severe weather and asteroids.
To sustain U.S. leadership in science by seeking
knowledge of the universe and searching for life beyond Earth.
Space offers a multitude of critical opportunities, unavailable
in Earth-based laboratories, to extend our knowledge of the
local and distant universe and to search for life beyond Earth.
To expand the frontiers of human activities in space.
Human space flight continues to challenge technology, utilize
unique human capabilities, bring global prestige, and excite
the public's imagination. Space provides almost limitless
opportunities for extending the human experience to new
frontiers.
To provide technological, economic, and societal
benefits that contribute solutions to the Nation's most
pressing problems. Space activities provide economic
opportunities, stimulate innovation, and support services that
improve the quality of life. U.S. economic competitiveness is
directly affected by our ability to perform in this sector and
the many sectors enabled and supported by space activities.
To inspire current and future generations. U.S. civil
space activities, built on a legacy of spectacular
achievements, should continue to inspire the public and also
serve to attract future generations of scientists and
engineers.
To enhance U.S. global strategic leadership through
leadership in civil space activities. Because of the growing
strategic importance of space, all nations that aspire to
global political and economic leadership in the 21st century
are increasing their space-faring capabilities. Continued U.S.
global leadership is tied to continued U.S. leadership in
space.
FOUNDATIONAL ELEMENTS
To contribute to realizing critical national objectives including
those listed above, the U.S. space program, both the civil and national
security components, must have a strong foundation and adequate
resources. While the breadth of the civil space program has grown,
there is also a sense that the program has been unfocused, with
corresponding impacts on the organizations and institutions that
support it. The United States can no longer pursue space activities on
the assumption of its unchallengeable dominance--as evidenced by the
view of other nations that the United States is not the only, or in
some cases even the best, option for space partnerships. U.S.
leadership in space activities and their capacity to serve urgent
national needs must be based on preeminent technical capabilities;
ingenuity, entrepreneurialism, and a willingness to take risk; and
recognition of mutual interdependencies. The time has come to reassess,
and in some cases reinvent, the institutions, workforce,
infrastructure, and technology base for U.S. space activities.
The committee identified four foundational elements critical to a
purposeful, effective, strategic U.S. space program, without which U.S.
space efforts will lack robustness, realism, sustainability, and
affordability:
1. Coordinated national strategies--implementing national space
policy coherently across all civilian agencies in support of national
needs and priorities and aligning attention to shared interests of
civil and national security space activities,
2. A competent technical workforce--sufficient in size, talent, and
experience to address difficult and pressing challenges,
3. An effectively sized and structured infrastructure--realizing
synergy from the public and private sectors and from international
partnerships, and
4. A priority investment in technology and innovation--
strengthening and sustaining the U.S. capacity to meet national needs
through transformational advances.
Efforts to establish each of these elements to ensure a strong
foundation for the Nation's civil space program must overcome several
impediments. The issues include a loss of focus on national
imperatives, overly constrained resources, inadequate coordination
across the Federal Government, missed opportunities to transition roles
from government-led to private sector-provided services, obstacles to
international cooperation, weakened institutional partnerships, and
lack of emphasis on advanced technology development programs. Awareness
of such issues--and not an effort to resolve specific instances--guided
the committee in its development of recommendations to NASA, NOAA, and
the Federal Government at the highest levels.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The committee found that, in spite of their promise and utility,
components of the civil space program are not always aligned to fully
capitalize on opportunities to serve the larger national interest.
Decisions about civil space priorities, strategies, and programs, and
the resources to achieve them, are not always made with a conscious
view toward their linkages to broader national interests. Accordingly,
the committee recommends as follows:
1. Addressing national imperatives. Emphasis should be placed on
aligning space program capabilities with current high-priority national
imperatives, including those where space is not traditionally
considered. The U.S. civil space program has long demonstrated a
capacity to effectively serve U.S. national interests.
Recommendation 1 provides a broad policy basis on which the
committee's subsequent specific recommendations rest. The
recommendations that follow address a set of actions, all of which are
necessary to strengthen the U.S. civil space program and reinforce or
enhance the contributions of civil space activities to broader national
objectives.
2. Climate and environmental monitoring. NASA and NOAA should lead
the formation of an international satellite-observing architecture
capable of monitoring global climate change and its consequences and
support the research needed to interpret and understand the data in
time for meaningful policy decisions by:
a. Reversing the deterioration of the U.S. Earth observation
infrastructure;
b. Developing and implementing a plan for achieving and
sustaining global Earth observations;
c. Working with the international community to develop an
integrated database for sensor information from all Earth-
monitoring satellites;
d. Aggressively pursuing technology development for future
high-priority Earth observation missions; and
e. Actively planning for transitions to continue demonstrably
useful research observations on a sustained, or operational,
basis.
3. Scientific inquiry. NASA, in cooperation with other agencies and
international partners, should continue to lead a program of scientific
exploration and discovery that:
a. Seizes opportunities to advance understanding of Earth, the
objects of the solar system including the Sun, and the vast
universe beyond;
b. Includes searches for evidence of life beyond Earth;
c. Contributes to understanding how the universe works, who we
are, where we came from, and what is the destiny of our star--
the Sun--our solar system, and the universe, and of the
physical laws that govern them; and
d. Is guided by peer review, advisory committees, and the
priorities articulated by the science communities in their
strategic planning reports, such as the NRC's decadal
surveys.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The NRC decadal surveys have been widely used by the scientific
community and by program decision-makers because they (a) present
explicit, consensus priorities for the most important, potentially
revolutionary science that should be undertaken within the span of a
decade; (b) develop priorities for future investments in research
facilities, space missions, and/or supporting programs; (c) rank
competing opportunities and ideas and clearly indicate which ones are
of higher or lower priority in terms of the timing, risk, and cost of
their implementation; and (d) make the difficult adverse decisions
about other meritorious ideas that cannot be accommodated within
realistically available resources.
4. Advanced space technology. NASA should revitalize its advanced
technology development program by establishing a DARPA-like
organization within NASA as a priority mission area to support
preeminent civil, national security (if dual-use), and commercial space
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
programs. The resulting program should:
a. Be organizationally independent of major development
programs;
b. Serve all civil space customers, including the commercial
sector;
c. Conduct an extensive assessment of the current state and
potential of civil space technology; and
d. Conduct cutting-edge fundamental research in support of the
Nation's space technology base.
5. International cooperation. The government, under White House
leadership, should pursue international cooperation in space
proactively as a means to advance U.S. strategic leadership and meet
national and mutual international goals by:
a. Expanding international partnerships in studies of global
change;
b. Leading an effort in which the Unites States and other
major space-faring nations cooperate to develop rules for a
robust space operating regime that ensures that space becomes a
more productive global commons for science, commerce, and other
activities;
c. Rationalizing export controls so as to ensure ongoing
prevention of inappropriate transfer of sensitive technologies
to adversaries while eliminating barriers to international
cooperation and commerce that do not contribute effectively to
national security;
d. Expanding international partnerships in the use of the
International Space Station;
e. Continuing international cooperation in scientific research
and human space exploration,
f. Engaging the nations of the developing world in educating
and training their citizens to take advantage of space
technology for sustainable development; and
g. Supporting the interchange of international scholars and
students.
6. Human space flight. NASA should be on the leading edge of
actively pursuing human space flight, to extend the human experience
into new frontiers, challenge technology, bring global prestige, and
excite the public's imagination. These goals should be accomplished by:
a. Setting challenging objectives that advance the frontier,
scientific and technological understanding, and the state-of-
the-art;
b. Establishing clear goals for each step in a sequence of
human space flight missions beyond low-Earth orbit that will
develop techniques and hardware that can be used in a next step
further outward;
c. Focusing use of the ISS on advancing capabilities for human
space exploration; and
d. Using human space flight to enhance the U.S. soft power
leadership by inviting emerging economic powers to join with us
in human space flight adventures.
National space policy too often has been implemented in a stovepipe
fashion that makes it difficult to recognize connections between space
activities and pressing national challenges. Often, senior policy-
makers with broad portfolios have not been able to take the time to
consider the space program in the broader national context. Rather,
policies have been translated into programs by setting budget levels
and then expecting agencies to manage to those budgets. The committee
believes that the process of aligning roles and responsibilities for
space activities, making resource commitments, and coordinating across
departments and agencies needs to be carried out at a sufficiently high
level that decisions are made from the perspective of addressing the
larger national issues whose resolution space activities can help
achieve. How this process is accomplished might change from
administration to administration, but the need for an approach that
will elevate attention to the proper level remains essential.
7. Organizing to meet national needs. The President of the United
States should task senior executive-branch officials to align agency
and department strategies; identify gaps or shortfalls in policy
coverage, policy implementation, and resource allocation; and identify
new opportunities for space-based endeavors that will help to address
critical issues now confronting the United States and, to a
considerable extent, the world as well.
The effort should include the Assistant to the President for
National Security Affairs and the Assistant to the President for
Science and Technology, and should consider the following elements:
a. Coordinating budgetary guidance across federal departments
and agencies involved in space activities;
b. Coordinating responsibility and accountability for resource
allocations for common services and/or infrastructure;
c. Coordinating responsibility and accountability for
stimulating, nurturing, and sustaining a robust space
industrial base, including the commercial space industry;
d. Coordinating responsibility and accountability for
initiatives to recruit and develop a competent aerospace
workforce of sufficient size and talent, anticipating future
needs;
e. Identifying, developing, and coordinating initiatives to
address long-range technological needs for future programs;
f. Identifying, developing, and coordinating initiatives to
establish and strengthen international space relationships;
g. Harmonizing the roles and responsibilities of federal
agencies to eliminate gaps and unnecessary duplication in the
Nation's space portfolio; and
h. Regularly reviewing coordinated national space strategies
and their success in implementing overall national space
policy.
Chairwoman Giffords. The hearing will come to order.
Good afternoon, everyone. I am so pleased that we are all
here, having an opportunity to talk about this very important
issue, but I am also excited, because this is the 40th
anniversary of the launch of Apollo 11's mission to the Moon.
There are a whole series of commemorative events planned
for this week and for next week, and it is clear that Apollo is
still considered one of the most significant achievements of
the U.S. space program, and I would go beyond that, and say of
all of mankind.
It is, of course, fitting that we pause to honor those who
blazed the trail that leads out beyond low-Earth orbit, both
the brave astronauts who undertook those hazardous expeditions
to the Moon, and the countless individuals and organizations
who enabled those expeditions to succeed.
Yet, by definition, our civil space program is about the
future, not about the past, and if our space program is to have
a sustainable and productive future, it also has to be
relevant. That is, America's space program must be relevant to
our broad national needs if it is going to continue to be
supported by Members of Congress and by the American people.
Yet, as the National Academies review, the Space
Foundation's annual report, and the NASA Authorization Act of
2008 all make clear, we can and should do more to enhance the
relevance of the civil space program, so it can continue to be
an important contributor to the Nation's strength and wellbeing
in the years and the decades to come. By that, I don't mean
that NASA and our space program should just be about spinoffs,
as important as the past ones have been to our economy, to our
science, and to our society.
Instead, what I am saying is that our space program is
important to Americans scientifically, technologically,
economically, and geopolitically, and we should recognize and
nurture that reality, so that we can maximize the benefits we
accrue from America's space program into the future. I think
that the National Academies panel put it pretty well. I quote:
``A preeminent U.S. civil space program with strengths and
capabilities aligned for tackling widely acknowledged national
challenges, environmental, economic, and strategic, is a
national imperative today, and will continue to grow in
importance in the future.''
That is an imperative that both Congress and the White
House will need to come to grips with if we are to have a
productive future in space exploration, yet that is only half
of the equation. You have all heard the old conundrum, if a
tree falls in the forest and no one hears about it. Well, we
face a similar conundrum with our civil space program. If we
have an incredibly exciting and relevant space program, but the
American people don't hear about it, don't understand it, and
don't know about it, is it really that relevant to the American
people? Because it is not an academic exercise, our space
program is incredibly important to this country's future
wellbeing, but we can't assume the public will just take the
assertion on faith. We need to be able to demonstrate it.
So, today's hearing is a part of that process. It is really
a first step in that process, and I can think of no better way
to honor the achievements of those who have led America to the
Moon, and created a space program that has been the envy of the
world, than to have a hearing like this today.
In closing, I again want to welcome our witnesses to
today's hearing.
I now recognize Mr. Olson for his opening comments.
[The prepared statement of Chairwoman Giffords follows:]
Prepared Statement of Chairwoman Gabrielle Giffords
Good afternoon. I'm pleased to welcome everyone to today's hearing
on this the 40th anniversary of the launch of the Apollo 11 mission to
the Moon.
There are a whole series of commemorative events planned for this
week and next, and it is clear that Apollo is still considered one of
the most significant achievements of the U.S. space program--and
deservedly so.
It's of course fitting that we pause to honor those who blazed the
trail that leads out beyond low-Earth orbit--both the brave astronauts
who undertook those hazardous expeditions to the Moon and the countless
individuals and organizations who enabled those expeditions to succeed.
Yet, by definition our civil space program is about the future--not
the past.
And if our space program is to have a sustainable and productive
future, it is also about relevance.
That is, America's civil space program must be relevant to our
broad national needs if it is going to continue to be supported.
Yet as the National Academies review, the Space Foundation's annual
report, and the NASA Authorization Act of 2008 all make clear, we can
and should do more to enhance the relevance of the civil space program
so that it can continue to be an important contributor to the Nation's
strength and well-being in the years and decades to come.
By that I don't mean that NASA and our space program should just be
about ``spinoffs,'' as important as past ones have been to our economy
and our society.
Instead what I'm saying is that our space program is important to
American scientifically, technologically, economically, and
geopolitically, and we should recognize and nurture that reality so
that we can maximize the benefits we accrue from America's space
program in the future.
I think the National Academies panel put it well:
``. . . A preeminent U.S. civil space program with strengths
and capabilities aligned for tackling widely acknowledged
national challenges--environmental, economic, and strategic--is
a national imperative today, and will continue to grow in
importance in the future.''
That is an imperative that both Congress and the White House will
need to come to grips with if we are to have a productive future in
space exploration.
Yet, that is only half of the equation.
You've all heard the old conundrum: ``If a tree falls in the forest
and no one is there to hear it . . ..''
Well, we face a similar conundrum with our civil space program.
If we have an incredibly exciting and relevant space program, but
the American people don't really know about it, is it really that
relevant?
Because it's not an academic exercise--our space program is
incredibly important to this country's future well being, but we can't
assume the public will just take that assertion on faith.
We need to be able to demonstrate it.
Today's hearing is a first step in that process, and I can think of
no better way to honor the achievements of those who led America to the
Moon and created a space program that has been the envy of the world.
In closing, I again want to welcome our witnesses to today's
hearing, and I will now recognize Mr. Olson for any opening statement
he may care to make.
Mr. Olson. Well, Madam Chairwoman, thank you so much for
calling this afternoon's hearing. I would like to thank the
witnesses for coming today to give us your time and your
expertise. Thank you.
I look forward to discussing how Congress and the executive
branch can collaborate to better enhance public perception of
the contributions that NASA and the civil space industry
provide our nation's economy and our quality of life.
My thanks to our panel of expert witnesses again, for
taking your time out of your busy schedules to appear before
the Subcommittee. Your unique perspectives are greatly valued
by the Members of this committee. Thank you again for coming
today.
You know, Madam Chairwoman, I am glad we are holding this
hearing today, but slightly discouraged that we have to hold it
at all. I assure you that this hearing would not have been one
that would have occurred on this day back in 1969. Forty years
ago today, Apollo 11 launched on a journey that changed
mankind's perception as to what was possible. We challenged our
scientists and our engineers to develop never before used
technologies to send humans on a mission that captivated the
world's attention and stirred humanity's collective
imagination. That alone made it relevant.
I am not sure it is possible to replicate that feeling
today, that sense of achievement, that sense of unlimited
possibilities, without an equally challenging goal, but that
does not mean that other critical discoveries and new
technologies NASA is developing or currently working on are not
equally compelling. Our landing on the Moon was the beginning
of a journey, not the end of one, and sometimes, I feel like we
have forgotten that.
Let us look at some of the issues that are critical to our
nation at this time, securing our economic future,
strengthening our education system, developing alternative
energy sources to ease our dependence on foreign oil, improving
our health care system, and protecting our environment. All of
these, all of these rate as high concerns among the American
public polled.
NASA scores high ratings when it stands alone for public
support, but suffers when put in a list of priorities with
other competing goals. This is in part because many Americans
aren't familiar with the wide breadth of space and Earth-
related research that NASA conducts, and the spinoffs that have
been developed from those experiments. To improve, we need to
ensure that we have a worthwhile and challenging human space
flight goal that is adequately funded, and we also have to
effectively convey that America's space program provides
concrete solutions to a wide array of societal problems.
The members of this panel are uniquely qualified to do
that. General Lyles recently chaired a study that addressed
many of these subjects. His report looked closely at the
overall challenges facing our civil space program. Mrs. Smith
and the Space Foundation, among other things, have published
``The Space Report: 2009,'' which includes a host of invaluable
information, but in my mind, the data provided about the space
economy is second to none. I am also thankful that Mrs. Myers
and Mr. O'Brien are here to give us some insight on
communicating to and hearing from the public. After all, it is
the public who we are asking to fund many of these endeavors.
When we are in this hearing room, particularly in this
subcommittee room, there is no need for convincing. I would
love to hear how all the enthusiasm that we share in this room
about space exploration can be conveyed to those people who are
standing out in the hall.
With that, Madam Chairman, I conclude my opening remarks,
and yield back my time.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Olson follows:]
Prepared Statement of Representative Pete Olson
Madam Chairwoman, thank you for calling this afternoon's hearing. I
look forward to discussing how Congress and the Executive Branch can
collaborate to better enhance public perception of the contributions
that NASA and the civil space industry provide our nation's economy,
and our quality of life. My thanks to our panel of expert witnesses for
taking time out of your busy schedules to appear before this
subcommittee. Your unique perspectives are greatly valued by the
Members of this committee. Thank you for agreeing to participate.
You know Madam Chairwoman, I am glad that we are holding this
hearing today, but slightly discouraged that we have to hold it at all.
I assure you that this hearing would not be one that would have been
held on this date in 1969. Forty years ago today, Apollo 11 launched on
a journey that changed mankind's perception as to what is possible. We
challenged our scientists and engineers to develop never-before-used
technologies to send humans on a mission that captivated the world's
attention and stirred humanities collective imagination. That alone
made it relevant.
I'm not sure it's possible to replicate that feeling--that sense of
achievement--that sense of unlimited possibilities--today without an
equally challenging goal, but that does not mean that other critical
discoveries and new technologies NASA is developing or is currently
working on, are not equally compelling. Our landing on the Moon was the
beginning of a journey, not the end of one. Sometimes I feel like we
have forgotten that.
Let us look at some of the issues that are critical to our nation
at this time: securing our economic future, strengthening our education
system, developing alternative energy sources to ease our dependence on
foreign oil, improving our health care system and protecting our
environment. All of these rate as high concerns when the American
public is polled. NASA scores high ratings when it stands alone for
public support, but suffers when put in a list of priorities with these
other issues. This in part because many Americans aren't familiar with
the wide breadth of space- and Earth-related research NASA conducts,
and the spinoffs that have been developed. To improve, we need to
ensure that we have a worthwhile and challenging human space flight
goal that is adequately funded, and we also have to effectively convey
that America's space program provides concrete solutions to solving a
wide array of societal problems.
The members of this panel are uniquely qualified to help us do
that. Gen. Lyles recently chaired a study that addressed many of these
subjects. His report looked closely at the overall challenges facing
our civil space program. Ms. Smith and the Space Foundation, among
other things, have published The Space Report 2009, which includes a
host of invaluable information, but in my mind the data provided about
the space economy is second to none. I am also thankful that Ms. Myers
and Mr. O'Brien are here to give us some insight on communicating to,
and hearing from, the public. After all, it is the public who we are
asking to fund many of these endeavors. When we are in this hearing
room, particularly in this subcommittee, there is no need for
convincing. I would love to hear how the enthusiasm that we all share
in this room about space exploration can be conveyed with those out in
the hall.
During this week, as we celebrate the 40th anniversary of Apollo
11, all of us should recognize what we have achieved, but do so with an
eye on the many discoveries and achievements yet to come.
Chairwoman Giffords. Thank you, Mr. Olson. I think we all
agree with your comments.
I would like to take a moment to introduce our witnesses.
First up, we have General Lester Lyles, who is testifying as
Chair of the National Research Council's Committee on the
Rationale and Goals of the U.S. Civil Space Program.
Next, we hear from Ms. Patti Grace Smith, who is a member
of the Board of Directors of the Space Foundation. Then, we
will hear from Ms. Deborah Adler Myers, who is the General
Manager of the Science Channel at Discovery Communications.
And finally, we have Mr. Miles O'Brien, who previously
acted as CNN's Chief Technology and Environment Correspondent,
now works as a freelance journalist, and I can personally say
is probably the most passionate citizen when it comes to space.
So, we are glad to have you here, Mr. O'Brien, and for all of
our panelists as well, welcome.
As our panelists should know, we are going to require that
we keep to around five minutes of testimony. I know that will
be hard, but we would like to just get your testimony out. We
will have the written testimony, of course, but then, we are
going to open it up to questions, and I am really looking
forward to having a great discussion.
And General Lyles, we will start with you.
STATEMENT OF GENERAL LESTER L. LYLES [U.S. AIR FORCE, RET.],
CHAIR OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE RATIONALE AND GOALS OF THE U.S.
CIVIL SPACE PROGRAM, AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ENGINEERING BOARD,
NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL
General Lyles. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, Members of the
Subcommittee. I thank you very much for giving us the
opportunity to testify before this subcommittee today.
I can't think of a better date to have this particular
hearing, and to talk about this very, very important topic. As
you stated, my name is Lester Lyles. I am a retired United
States Air Force four-star general, and during my 35 years in
the United States Air Force, I have had the opportunity to be
involved in numerous space programs: as the Commander of the
Air Force's Space and Missile System Center; and in Los
Angeles, as Director of the Ballistic Missile Defense
Organization, now called the Missile Defense Agency; as the
Vice Chief of Staff of the United States Air Force; and then,
finally, as the Commander of the Air Force Materiel Command.
Today, however, I speak to you as the Chair of the National
Research Council's Committee on the Rationale and Goals of the
United States Civil Space Program, which recently, last week,
released the report ``America's Future in Space: Aligning the
Civil Space Program with National Needs.''
My committee, the committee that looked at this particular
topic, contained 14 members. We had distinguished experts in
science and engineering, economics, political science, public
policy, national security, and of course, space systems and
space exploration. And with your permission, Madam Chairwoman,
I am going to submit my prepared testimony for the record, and
would like to just summarize, if you will, what our task was,
and what the views were of this particular committee.
First, I will start by saying I thank the National Academy
Presidents, Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Chuck Vest, Academy of
Science and the Academy of Engineering, for sponsoring this
very, very important topic. This was not a topic sponsored by
some other agency, NASA, or any other organization. This was
the Academies' opportunity and attempt to address a subject
they thought was very important for the 21st century and for
our country.
And what they tasked us to do was to take a broad look at
identifying the key goals and critical issues for the 21st
century for the United States civil space policy and civil
space programs. They asked us to address overarching goals, to
identify areas of national interest, and to identify,
hopefully, solutions to some of the issues that we might
encounter.
And even though we were asked to take a look, or told to
take a look at specific programmatic things, we were asked
specifically to stay at a strategic level. Don't get down into
weeds, and describe how to build a rocket, or one rocket
solution versus another, but to look at the big strategic goals
for the country and for the civil space program in general.
We started out by taking a very broad definition of civil
space. Most people, I dare say, even in this room, of learned
experts in the space arena, when you say civil space, they
immediately think of NASA. Our definition of civil space was
much broader. It included NOAA, the National Science
Foundation, it included commercial space opportunities. It
included academia. It included everything except national
security space or intelligence space, though we obviously had
to touch upon those two entities, because of the common ground
and common themes, and certainly, common industrial base shared
by each one of those different entities.
So, our scope was rather broad, and we think we did as best
we could to encompass all of the different arenas, and
everybody we possibly could, to ensure we got a broad breadth
look at this topic.
I think, to summarize what the bottom line for our study
was, it is sort of revealed in the title of our final report.
You quoted our sort of final context, if you will, of our
study, Madam Chairwoman. Our overall conclusion is that we have
a preeminent United States civil space program. It has been
that way in the past, it is that way today, and it should stay
that way for the future. And the strengths and capabilities of
that, those civil space activities, we think, are vastly
available and vastly able to contribute to broader national
challenges beyond just space exploration, including dealing
with issues of climate and climate change, environmental,
economic challenges, strategic and leadership opportunities,
the economy, et cetera.
In our term, you quoted it also, is that there is a
national imperative to make sure that our civil space programs
are aligned to do those kind of things that it can contribute
solutions to so, in such a broad, broad sense.
Our civil space program should be preeminent, in the sense
that it can influence, by its example, other nations and their
use of space, but also give us an opportunity to maintain
strategic leadership, and use our space programs to help
international cooperation, wherever we possibly could.
I was very, very pleased to see an op-ed published the day
before yesterday by Congressman Ralph Hall, in which he talked
about this very topic, and we thought was very, very
appropriate. I agree with everything that Congressman Hall
stated in his report. The only thing different is that from our
perspective, we think that the civil space program alignment
doesn't just focus in a narrow beam. We think we should
continue doing the things we are doing today, in addition to
looking at ways we can make that appropriate alignment.
I will very quickly, because my light just lit up, the red
light, point out the six goals that we defined and four
foundational elements we think are critical. The first goal is
to reestablish leadership for the protection of Earth and its
inhabitants through the use of space research and technology.
You could call this stewardship of the Earth. We think it is a
very, very important goal, and should be one of the major
things for civil space.
To sustain and expand our leadership in science, by seeking
knowledge of the universe, and searching for life beyond. To
expand the frontiers of human activities in space. To provide
technological, economic, and societal benefits, where space
technologies and space capabilities can contribute solutions.
To inspire current and future generations, and to enhance U.S.
global strategic leadership.
Those are our goals, and our recommendations sort of
revolve around that. I won't, obviously, get into that, in the
interests of time. Be more than willing to answer any questions
about them. But I think it is important to very quickly mention
four foundational elements that our report thought were
absolutely critical to be addressed by the Administration, by
the Congress, and by others, if those goals are to be achieved.
One is greater coordination through whatever means
possible, a National Space Council, some other leadership forum
where all of the agencies involved in space can do a better job
of integrating and coordinating their space activities. The
need for a competent technical workforce to address that from a
broader sense than, perhaps, is being done today. To
effectively size and structure the infrastructure for space
with the organizations that are involved in space activities.
And probably, very, very critical to one of the comments you
mentioned, to look for priority investment or reinvestment in
technology and innovation. And again, I can elaborate on each
one of them.
I would like to just close very quickly, in talking about
inspiration. I grew up here in Washington, D.C., Madam
Chairwoman, and I was inspired when President Kennedy made his
announcement about we are going to the Moon, and we are going
to bring a human back. I was not about, just about to enter
high school, actually, a few years from entering high school,
here in Washington, D.C., and that statement, that goal, that
far-reaching opportunity expressed by the President for the
United States, inspired me to seek out a math and technology
related high school in the District, and not go to the part of
the District where, high school that I was supposed to go to,
which was known mostly for basketball players and criminals,
but--so, I chose another place to, because I was inspired by
what the President stated.
I chose engineering at Howard University because of the
inspiration of the Apollo program. Today, however, when I look
at my own children, my four children, one doctor, one lawyer,
one businesswoman, one businessman. They are very, very
successful. They are inspired by things like the space launch
yesterday, but on a day to day basis, what inspires them is
what can be done to solve the economic problems in our country,
the environmental problems, the energy problems in our country.
And I am just very, very enthused to think that they can be
educated amongst as many others, in the hallways and in the
public, and the Nation can be better educated by understanding
how the civil space programs can contribute solutions to those
big challenges that most people worry about on a day to day
basis.
Madam Chairwoman, I thank you for being here. I am enthused
about this subject, and very, very pleased that the Committee
asked me to testify.
[The prepared statement of General Lyles follows:]
Prepared Statement of General Lester L. Lyles
Madam Chair and Members of the Subcommittee, I appreciate the
opportunity to appear before you today. My name is Lester Lyles, I am a
retired USAF four-star general and during my 35 years with the U.S. Air
Force, I served as Commander of the Space and Missile Systems Center at
Los Angeles AFB in California, Director of the Ballistic Missile
Defense Organization, Vice Chief of Staff at USAF/HQ, and Commander of
the U.S. Air Force Materiel Command.
Today, I speak to you as the Chair of the National Research
Council's Committee on the Rationale and Goals of the U.S. Civil Space
Program, which recently released the report America's Future in Space:
Aligning the Civil Space Program with National Needs. The committee's
14 members included distinguished experts in science, engineering,
economics, political science and public policy, national security, and
of course, space systems and space exploration.
With your permission, I would like to submit my prepared testimony
for the record and summarize my views for you here this morning,
leaving sufficient time to answer any questions you may have.
Before addressing the questions posed by the Subcommittee, let me
summarize our report.
CONTEXT OF THE REPORT
Without a doubt, the first 50 years of the space age have
transformed the Nation and the world. Astronauts have stood on Earth's
Moon while millions watched. Commercial communications and remote
sensing satellites have become part of the basic infrastructure of the
world. Satellites support worldwide communications, providing a
critical backbone for daily commerce--carrying billions of global
financial transactions daily, for example. Our understanding of every
aspect of the cosmos has been profoundly altered, and in the view of
many, we stand once again at the brink of a new era. We have discovered
that the expansion of the universe continues to accelerate, driven by a
force that we do not yet understand and that there are large amounts of
matter in the universe that we cannot yet observe. We have discovered
planets around other stars, so many that it is ever more likely that
there are other Earths comparable to our own.
The next 50 years of civil space will occur in a globalized world
of societies and nations characterized by intertwined economies, trade
commitments, and international security agreements. Mutual dependencies
are much more pervasive and important than ever before. Many of the
pressing problems that now require our best efforts to understand and
resolve--from terrorism to climate change to demand for energy--are
also global in nature and must be addressed through mutual worldwide
action.
In the judgment of the Committee on the Rationale and Goals of the
U.S. Civil Space Program, the ability to operate from, through, and in
space will be a key component of potential solutions to 21st century
challenges. As it has before, with the necessary alignment to achieve
clearly articulated national priorities, the U.S. civil space\1\
program can serve the Nation effectively in this new and demanding
environment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The committee considered ``civil space'' to include all
government, commercial, academic, and private space activities not
directly intended for military or intelligence use.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the committee's view, our study needed to address the top-level
goals of the civil space program and the connection between those goals
and broad national priorities. These connections form a foundation on
which the Nation, both now and in the future, can devise sustainable
solutions to nearer-term issues in the implementation of the civil
space program. Therefore, the committee focused on the long-term,
strategic value of a U.S. civil space program, and our report does not
address nearer-term issues that affect the conduct of U.S. space
activities other than to provide a context in which more tactical
decisions might be made.
The national priorities that informed the committee's thinking
include ensuring national security, providing clean and affordable
energy, protecting the environment now and for future generations,
educating an engaged citizenry and a capable workforce for the 21st
century, sustaining global economic competitiveness, and working
internationally to build a safer, more sustainable world. A common
element across all these urgent priorities is the significant part that
research and development can play in solving problems and advancing the
national enterprise in each area. Instruments in space have documented
an accelerating decline in arctic sea ice, mapped the circulation of
the world's oceans, enabled the creation of quantitative three-
dimensional data sets to improve the quality of hurricane forecasting,
and created new tools to address a host of agricultural, coastal, and
urban resource management problems, to cite only a few examples. Such
capabilities demonstrate what can be achieved when technologically
challenging space problems stimulate innovation that leads to long-term
advances with applications beyond the space sector. Civil space
activities are central to the R&D enterprise of the Nation, often in a
transformational way, and thus present powerful opportunities to help
address major national objectives.
The committee's overall conclusion is that a preeminent U.S. civil
space program with strengths and capabilities aligned for tackling
widely acknowledged national challenges--environmental, economic, and
strategic--is a national imperative today, and will continue to grow in
importance in the future.
GOALS FOR THE CIVIL SPACE PROGRAM
For the United States to be a strategic leader in a globalized
world, its civil space program must be of a breadth, competence, and
accomplishment so that U.S. leadership is demonstrated, accepted, and
welcomed. The committee identified six strategic goals that it regards
as basic for guiding program choices and resources planning for U.S.
civil space activities. The goals all serve the national interest, and
steady progress in achieving each of them is necessary. These goals
address such issues as U.S. leadership in science and technology,
understanding climate change and protecting Earth's environment,
providing economic and societal benefits, inspiration of future
generations, strategic leadership in space, and human space flight, and
they are articulated in more detail in the written report.
FOUNDATIONAL ELEMENTS
While the breadth of the civil space program has grown, there is
also a sense that the program has been unfocused, sometimes at the
expense of the effectiveness of the organizations and institutions that
support it. The United States can no longer pursue space activities on
the assumption of its unchallengeable dominance--as evidenced by the
view of other nations that the United States is not the only, or in
some cases even the best, option for space partnerships. U.S.
leadership in space activities and their capacity to serve urgent
national needs must be based on preeminent technical capabilities;
ingenuity, entrepreneurialism, and a willingness to take risk; and
recognition of mutual interdependencies. The time has come to reassess,
and in some cases reinvent, the institutions, workforce,
infrastructure, and technology base for U.S. space activities.
The committee identified four foundational elements critical to a
purposeful, effective, strategic U.S. space program, without which U.S.
space efforts will lack robustness, realism, sustainability, and
affordability. Those elements (which are described in greater detail in
the written report) are coordinated national strategies, a competent
technical workforce, an effectively sized and structured
infrastructure, and a priority investment in technology and innovation.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The committee found that, in spite of their promise and utility,
components of the civil space program are not always aligned to fully
capitalize on opportunities to serve the larger national interest.
Decisions about civil space priorities, strategies, and programs, and
the resources to achieve them, are not always made with a conscious
view toward their linkages to broader national interests. The committee
made recommendations addressing a broad variety of civil space issues,
from Earth stewardship to human space exploration to scientific and
technological innovation. For the purposes of today's hearing, I would
like to highlight two recommendations.
Recommendation 1 states that emphasis should be placed on aligning
space program capabilities with current high-priority national
imperatives, including those where space is not traditionally
considered. The U.S. civil space program has long demonstrated a
capacity to effectively serve U.S. national interests. This
recommendation provides a broad policy basis on which the committee's
subsequent recommendations rest.
Recommendation 7 uses a broader perspective on civil space to
highlight that the success of all of the recommendations in the report
relies upon the alignment of the various elements of the civil space
program.
National space policy too often has been implemented in a stovepipe
fashion that obscures the connection between space activities and other
pressing needs of the Nation. Consequently, senior policy-makers with
broad portfolios have not been able to take the time to consider the
space program in the broader national context. Rather, policies have
been translated into programs by setting budget levels and then
expecting agencies to manage to those budgets. This has resulted in the
much-repeated assertion, with which the committee agrees, that agencies
like NASA are being asked to do too much with too little. The committee
believes that the process of aligning roles and responsibilities for
space activities, making resource commitments, and coordinating across
departments and agencies needs to be carried out at a sufficiently high
level that decisions are made from the perspective of the larger
national issues regarding which space activities play roles. How this
process is accomplished might change from administration to
administration, but the need for an approach that will elevate
attention to the proper level remains essential.
Therefore, the committee's recommendation is that the President of
the United States should task senior executive-branch officials to
align agency and department strategies; identify gaps or shortfalls in
policy coverage, policy implementation, and resource allocation; and
identify new opportunities for space-based endeavors that will help to
address critical issues now confronting the United States and, to a
considerable extent, the world as well.
The effort should include the Assistant to the President for
National Security Affairs and the Assistant to the President for
Science and Technology, and should consider such elements as budgetary
guidance, resource allocation, the space industrial base, the aerospace
workforce, long-range technological needs, international space
relationships, elimination of unnecessary duplication of space efforts,
and regular coordination of national space strategies and their success
in implementing overall national space policy.
U.S. space activities--both national security and civil--are not
isolated elements of the national enterprise. They interact with the
broader aspects of our nation's commerce, transportation, education,
and international relations. Civil space activities always have been,
and will continue to be, excellent vehicles for educating future
scientists and engineers, promoting positive international relations,
and supporting the Nation's foreign policy objectives.
At this time, I would like to address the Subcommittee's questions.
THE RELEVANCE OF SPACE TO NATIONAL NEEDS
As mentioned above, U.S. space activities are not isolated elements
of the national enterprise. Civil space activities, within which the
committee includes academic, commercial and private sector activities,
are a central part of the Nation's research and development portfolio
and interact with the broader aspects of our nation's commerce,
transportation, education, and international relations.
Our report cites numerous examples of the importance of space in
addressing important national needs. For example:
Observations of the Earth from space provide
scientists and policy-makers with essential data on a wide
variety of subjects, from the path and behavior of major storms
to the regional consequences of global climate change.
Space science missions have, among other discoveries,
identified new effects that indicate our understanding of the
basic laws of physics is incomplete. The impact of this
discovery has stimulated research efforts across the country,
supported by the National Science Foundation and the Department
of Energy as well as by NASA directly.
The construction of the International Space Station
has provided significant experience in leading a large,
international engineering project. Lessons learned in this
endeavor have important implications in a future that is sure
to include more frequent and complex international cooperative
efforts.
Communications satellites are a vital piece of the
Nation's telecommunications infrastructure.
The GPS system, though built and operated by the U.S.
Air Force, has provided significant civilian benefits and has
opened entirely new economic markets.
Civil space efforts are an important part of the
national system of innovation, which forms the basis of our
economic strength and lays the foundation for our nation's
continued prosperity.
MAXIMIZING THE BENEFITS FROM SPACE
The committee's report provides seven detailed recommendations
which, if implemented, well maximize the civil space program's ability
to benefit the Nation. In particular, I would like to take this
opportunity to highlight those recommendations where Congressional
leadership could have significant impact.
The committee recommends that NASA should continue its excellent
program of scientific exploration and discovery, as a central component
of the Nation's research and development enterprise. Continued
Congressional recognition of the civil space program's role in this
area, alongside agencies such as the Department of Energy, the National
Science Foundation, and the National Institutes of Health, will help to
keep these programs aligned with national goals and objectives.
The committee recommends several areas where NASA and NOAA should
work collectively to improve our understanding of the Earth and
communicate this knowledge broadly, both domestically and
internationally. The Congress could assist in these efforts by
continuing to recognize that the two agencies each have vital,
complementary roles to play and by providing the necessary resources,
guidance and flexibility for the agencies to smoothly transition new
capabilities from NASA's R&D environment to NOAA's operational
responsibilities.
The committee recommends that NASA establish an independent
technology development program, modeled after the Defense Advanced
Research Project Agency. This program should be independent of the
Agency's flight programs and should focus on nascent technologies that
could be broadly applicable to the space industry at large. It should
support the best ideas and research, regardless of where the research
team is found. In the near-term, Congressional leadership in the
establishment and support of this effort will be crucial for its
initial success. Over the longer-term, Congressional oversight will
undoubtedly be necessary to ensure that the program remains true to
these principles in the face of inevitable programmatic and budgetary
pressures.
As part of its recommendation on how to use the civil space program
to further U.S. strategic leadership, the committee highlights the need
for reform of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), in
order to prevent the inappropriate transfer of sensitive technologies
to our adversaries while eliminating barriers to international
cooperation and commerce that do not effectively contribute to national
security. Congressional action is essential to this reform effort.
Finally, I would like to emphasize the necessity for the Executive
Branch to align agency and department strategies. The committee
recommends a broad outline for how this should be accomplished and the
range of issues that should be covered. Congressional attention to, and
oversight of, this effort will help to ensure that the goal of a
maximally and efficiently beneficial civil space program is achieved.
DRAWING INSPIRATION FROM SPACE ACTIVITIES
As the committee states in the report, a space program that
achieves its programmatic goals but does stimulate educational
opportunities or inspirational moments would fail to achieve its full
potential. The committee did not directly address the most effective
ways to motivate future generations, but did point out that a
successful space program demands advances in a wide range of
activities, from biomedicine to the physical sciences to aerospace
engineering.
COMMUNICATING THE RELEVANCE OF THE CIVIL SPACE PROGRAM
The committee believes that the fundamental role that space
programs play in daily life has often been overlooked. Discussions of
the space program are generally focused on the accomplishments of the
1960's and not on the broad, relevant program that exists today. Though
seldom explicitly stated, there seems to be a national consensus that
to be successful the space program needs to replicate the Apollo
Program, either literally or figuratively. Our report argues that the
Apollo Program is inextricably tied to the Cold War environment. The
Nation needs to recognize that in our increasingly globalized world a
broad, vigorous civil space program provides essential solutions to
many of the challenges we face.
This completes my prepared remarks. Thank you for your attention to
this report, and I would be pleased to take questions if you have them.
Biography for General Lester L. Lyles
LESTER L. LYLES, Chair, is a consultant with the Lyles Group. He
retired from the U.S. Air Force (USAF) in 2003 as commander of the Air
Force Material Command at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base (AFB) in
Ohio. Gen. Lyles entered the USAF in 1968 as a distinguished graduate
of the Air Force ROTC program. He served in various positions,
including program element monitor of the Short-Range Attack Missile at
USAF Headquarters (USAF/HQ), special assistant and aide-de-camp to the
commander of Air Force Systems Command (AFSC), Chief of the Avionics
Division in the F-16 Systems Program Office, Director of Tactical
Aircraft Systems at AFSC headquarters, and as Director of the Medium-
Launch Vehicles Program and Space-Launch Systems offices. Gen. Lyles
became AFSC headquarters' Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff for
requirements in 1989, and Deputy Chief of Staff for requirements in
1990. In 1992, he became Vice Commander of Ogden Air Logistics Center
at Hill AFB in Utah. He served as Commander of the center until 1994,
when he was assigned to command the Space and Missile Systems Center at
Los Angeles AFB in California. In 1996, Gen. Lyles became the Director
of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization. In May 1999, he was
assigned as Vice Chief of Staff at USAF/HQ. He is a member of the
National Research Council (NRC) Air Force Studies Board and served on
the NASA Advisory Council. His numerous awards include the Defense
Distinguished Service Medal, the Astronautics Engineer of the Year from
the National Space Club, the National Black Engineer of the Year Award,
Honorary Doctor of Laws from New Mexico State University, and NASA's
Distinguished Public Service Medal for serving on the President's
Commission on Implementing the U.S. Space Exploration Policy.
Chairwoman Giffords. Thank you, General Lyles. Ms. Smith,
please.
Ms. Smith. Good afternoon, Chairwoman Giffords, Ranking
Member Olson----
Chairwoman Giffords. Ms. Smith, we are going to have you
push your button, so we can--there we go.
STATEMENT OF MS. PATTI GRACE SMITH, MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF
DIRECTORS, THE SPACE FOUNDATION
Ms. Smith. Good afternoon Chairwoman Giffords, Ranking
Member Olson, and other distinguished Members of the
Subcommittee. My name is Patti Grace Smith, and I am a member
of the Board of Directors of the Space Foundation.
On behalf of myself and the Space Foundation's CEO, Elliot
Pulham, I want to thank the subcommittee for providing the
Space Foundation the honor to sit in front of you, to talk
about enhancing the relevance of space to address national
needs. I applaud the subcommittee for picking today to hold
this hearing, on the 40th anniversary of Apollo 11 lifting off
the pad on its historic mission to the Moon.
Before I begin to address the questions the subcommittee
asked me to discuss, I would like to provide you with a little
background on the Space Foundation. Our mission is simply to
advance space related endeavors, to inspire, enable, and propel
humanity. The Space Foundation was founded March 21, 1983, as
an IRS 501(c)(3) organization, to foster, develop, and promote
among the citizens of the United States of America, and among
other people of the world, a greater understanding and
awareness of the practical and theoretical utilization of
space, on behalf of the benefit of civilization and the
fostering of a peaceful and prosperous world.
As the global space community has evolved, so has the Space
Foundation, embracing all facets of space: the commercial,
including telecommunications and other satellite-based
services; civil; and national security. Outside of Colorado
Springs, the Space Foundation's largest presence is in
Washington, D.C., where our Government Affairs Team and our
Research and Analysis Team reside.
The Research and Analysis Team works year-round in
producing white papers, and most prominently, The Space Report,
which we submitted for your review. This is our flagship
publication, and The Space Report is a snapshot, we think, of
the global space economy.
Now that I have provided some information for those of you
who may be new to the Space Foundation and what we do, I will
begin to address the questions. How relevant is space to
addressing important national needs? What noteworthy benefits
have been achieved as a result of past space related
investments?
Well, let me just say right off the top, space is very
relevant. It is so relevant that without it, many of us would
be at a loss in conducting our daily lives. Space influences so
many things, and benefits so many parts of our universe of our
daily lives. Space is the bedrock of America's economic and
strategic power. According to ``The Space Report 2009,'' the
global space economy has grown to $257 billion. That is not an
insignificant number, $257 billion.
In the macro sense, ``The Space Report 2009'' cites, in
depth, how space enables a variety of important needs, national
needs. National security is enabled by space. The U.S. military
could not fight as effectively and efficiently as it does
without the aid of space systems. Other nations seek to emulate
what we do with space, because they recognize the power and the
benefit that it gives. With each new generation of military
space systems, troops farther down the chain of command are
given access to powerful space-enabled tactical capabilities
that were once only available to senior commandants.
Governments, in the area of governance, policy-makers need
accurate data, accurate data that they can rely on a variety of
issues, ranging from climate to urban planning to resource
monitoring. Remote sensing from space has provided this data,
and will continue to do so, as long as the investment is made
in new space systems for this purpose.
Take Hurricane Katrina, of the past. Satellite
communications are often the only way for emergency responders
to coordinate their efforts, in the absence of terrestrial
infrastructure. They could not have done the job without the
space assets.
Technology developed to detect stresses in the frame of the
Space Shuttle has been adapted for use on Earth, and is now
helping to monitor the structural integrity of bridges and
other structures to ensure public safety. As far as the economy
goes, financial systems rely on GPS satellites for accurate
timing of transactions. Satellite-based Internet connectivity
offers a practical way to bring rural populations into the
Internet Age, and join the information economy, one of the
Administration's goals.
Transportation. I personally know that space is integral to
the next generation air transportation system being implemented
by the FAA, which will enable cleaner, safer, and more
efficient air travel. On the local scale, metropolitan
authorities in several cities have implemented systems like the
one now in place for D.C.'s Metro service, which allows
passengers to check on the Internet or by telephone to see when
the next bus will arrive. Innovations like this encourage the
use of public transportation, thereby reducing pollution and
traffic.
The Space Report highlights a number of specific areas, it
is not an exhaustive list, where everyday space products,
services, and benefits are realized. And we must understand
that space influences other parts of our economy and businesses
that it touches, as it embraces the service it provides to our
citizens. I would posit to the subcommittee that a day without
space, a day without space-generated benefits for American
consumers, would be a shocking, if not traumatic experience for
most Americans.
And I see the red light, so let me wrap up quickly. Let me
just say that in terms of how we maximize the benefits to be
realized from the Nation's space activities, and the relevance
of those space activities.
I want to first commend President Obama on his decision to
review the entire U.S. space policy. We welcome that review. I
think that the activities are pretty well aligned with our
national goals and objectives. In fact, many of our goals and
objectives depend on and are enabled by space assets. Having
said that, however, I feel I must touch on a larger problem in
order to address this question.
In order for the U.S. Government to maximize the benefits
of this investment, and we all, as citizens, want to maximize
the benefits of our investments in space, it must improve the
acquisition of those systems. Currently, we are facing a number
of gaps across the entire range of the civilian and national
security space systems. From human space flight to solar
radiation detection, to next generation GPS, to missile
warning, to climate and weather monitoring, there are, and soon
will be gaps in coverage and capability that will hamper our
ability to derive benefits from space. And the gaps will
eventually force us, if we don't act, to be more reliant than
we already are on foreign space systems, and that would be not
a good thing, I don't think.
Fourthly, we need to modernize the export control regime.
That is an area that has been begging attention for some time.
The Space Report 2009 shows that the commercial sector now
makes up 68 percent of the global space economy, 68 percent.
So, regulatory changes, such as export control, have the
potential of generating considerably more R&D funds than direct
investment by the government.
Is it inspirational? Absolutely. It is essential. All you
had to do was be in the desert of Mojave in 2004, and see the
thousands of people who assembled there, young and old, from
all over the country, all over the world, to see their eyes
light up with the first flight of a private human space flight
vehicle, to know how exciting it is, and to see how the younger
generation, the Gen Y generation, are so excited, so passionate
about engaging in space in a different way. Look at the
workforce that SpaceX has put together in California, largely
made up of Gen Ys, and they are there because they feel that we
are on the brink of something really exciting. They want to be
a part of it.
So, finally, how well does the public understand? Not very
well. And I would suggest that we need to look at the tools
that the younger generation uses to communicate. They are not
the traditional tools that we used, or others like us. They are
Facebook. They are other forms of technology that they are
very, very adept at. It has become their new telephone. They
communicate messages, groups like Netroots and others around
the country are communicating all day in cyberspace, and can
carry messages that we cannot carry otherwise. So, that is an
area that I am very, very concerned about, very interested in.
We need to move away from audiences that have space on the
agenda, speaking to space choirs. We have got to broaden that
audience to a broader public.
So, with that, let me stop here, and just say to paraphrase
Arianespace's CEO, Jean-Yves Le Gall, when he said recently:
``Launches speak louder than words.'' We have got to get on
with it. That will tell the story better than anything will.
I welcome any of your questions at the end of this. Thank
you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Smith follows:]
Prepared Statement of Patti Grace Smith
Good morning Chairwoman Giffords, Ranking Member Olson, and
distinguished Members of the Subcommittee. My name is Patti Grace Smith
and I am one of the Board of Directors for the Space Foundation. On
behalf of myself and Space Foundation CEO, Elliot Pulham, I want to
thank the Subcommittee for providing the Space Foundation the honor to
sit before you today to talk about enhancing the relevance of space to
address national needs.
I applaud the Subcommittee for picking today to hold this hearing,
on the 40th anniversary of Apollo 11 lifting off the pad on its
historic mission to the Moon.
Background
Before I begin to address the questions the Subcommittee asked me
to discuss today, I'd like to provide the Subcommittee with a little
background on the Space Foundation.
Our mission: To advance space-related endeavors to inspire, enable,
and propel humanity.
In 1983, a small group of visionary leaders in Colorado Springs saw
a need to establish an organization that could, in a non-partisan,
objective and fair manner, bring together the various sectors of
America's developing space community and serve as a credible source of
information for a broad audience--from space professionals to the
general public. The Space Foundation was founded March 21, 1983, as an
IRS 501 (c)(3) organization ``to foster, develop and promote, among the
citizens of the United States of America and among other people of the
world . . . a greater understanding and awareness . . . of the
practical and theoretical utilization of space . . . for the benefit of
civilization and the fostering of peaceful and prosperous world.''
As the global space community has evolved, so has the Space
Foundation--embracing all facets of space--commercial (including
telecommunications and other satellite-based services), civil, and
national security. In fact, the Foundation is one of a few space-
related organizations that embrace the totality of this community
rather than focusing on a narrowly defined niche.
In the 26 years since its founding, the Space Foundation has become
one of the world's premier non-profit organizations supporting space
activities, space professionals and education. The Foundation's
education programs have touched teachers in all 50 U.S. states and
Germany. It sponsors and conducts the premier events for space
professionals anywhere in the world today: the National Space
Symposium, the Strategic Space Symposium in Omaha and the Space
Business Forum in New York City.
Outside of Colorado Springs, the Space Foundation's largest
presence is in Washington DC. This is where our government affairs team
and our Research and Analysis (R&A) team reside. Our government affairs
team are not lobbyists, but rather work to promote and educate
decision-makers about space writ large. They hold informational and
educational briefings on a variety of civil, commercial and national
security space issues. The R&A team works year-round in producing white
papers and most prominently, the annual Space Report. The Space Report
is the Space Foundation's ``flagship'' publication. The Space Report is
a snapshot of the global space economy.
As I mentioned earlier, my role with the Space Foundation is as a
member of the Board of Directors. Our current chairman is retired
General Tom Moorman Jr. USAF (Ret.), our Vice Chairman is Dr. Bill
Ballhaus, our treasurer is Mr. Lon Levin and our secretary is Mr. Marty
Faga. I'd like to point out to this committee that its one-time
Chairman, Bob Walker, was also on our board and even served as its
Chairman.
Now, that I've provided some information for those of you who may
be new to the Space Foundation and what we do, I will begin to address
the questions presented to me.
How relevant is space to addressing important national needs, and what
noteworthy benefits have been achieved as a result of past space-
related investments?
I am not saying anything new when I say to you that space is
absolutely essential to all facets of modern human existence. Space is
the bedrock of America's economic and strategic power. According to The
Space Report 2009, the global space economy has grown to $257 billion,
a number that is not insignificant.
In the macro-sense, The Space Report 2009 cites in-depth how space
enables a variety of important national needs:
National security: The U.S. military could not fight
as effectively and efficiently as it does today without the aid
of space systems. Other nations seek to emulate this capability
because they have seen how powerful it is. With each new
generation of military space systems, troops farther down the
chain of command are given access to powerful space-enabled
tactical capabilities that were once only available to senior
commanders.
Governance: Policy-makers need accurate data on a
variety of issues ranging from climate to urban planning to
resource monitoring. Remote sensing from space has provided
this data and will continue to do so as long as the investment
is made in new space systems for this purpose. When natural
disasters such as Hurricane Katrina occur, satellite
communications are often the only way for emergency responders
to coordinate their efforts in the absence of terrestrial
infrastructure. Technology developed to detect stresses in the
frame of the Space Shuttle has been adapted for use on Earth
and is now helping to monitor the structural integrity of
bridges and other structures to ensure public safety.
Economy: Financial systems rely on GPS satellites for
accurate timing of transactions. Satellite-based Internet
connectivity offers a practical way to bring rural populations
into the Internet age and join the information economy--one of
the Administration's goals.
Transportation: I personally know that space is
integral to the Next Generation Air Transportation System being
implemented by the FAA, which will enable cleaner, safer, more
efficient air travel. On a local scale, metropolitan
authorities in several cities have implemented systems like the
one now in place for D.C.'s Metrobus service, which allows
passengers to check on the Internet or by telephone to see when
the next bus will arrive. Innovations like this encourage the
use of public transportation, thereby reducing pollution and
traffic.
Additionally, The Space Report 2009 enumerated an exhaustive list
of `everyday' space products, services and benefits. Some of the most
prominent:
Weather prediction/disaster mitigation
Resource exploration/exploitation
Erosion monitoring and management
Global communications
Guidance/navigation/timing
Population forecasting
Attaining a better understanding of our place in the
universe
The numerous spin-offs that have directly enriched
the lives of people all over the world. Investment in space
constantly generates new products and spinoff technologies that
U.S. companies can build and market.
In The Space Report 2009, one new emerging area that more and more
Americans are using via their iPhones and other hand-held PDAs is that
of ``geoinformatics.'' This is a very unique convergence of GPS, and
remote sensing to enable the user to have real-time location-based
content. The average user of such capabilities will be blissfully
unaware that space-based systems helped him find a flower shop at the
last minute on his anniversary, he'll just be glad he has it and soon
will take it, much like all other space enabled capabilities, for
granted.
I would posit to the Subcommittee that a ``day without space''--a
day without space generated benefits for American consumers, would be a
shocking, if not, traumatic experience for most Americans.
The inspirational value of space activities is equally important,
but I will address that point later in my testimony.
What does the Space Foundation recommend be done to maximize the
benefits to be realized from the Nation's space activities and the
relevance of those space activities? How important is it for those
activities to be aligned to national goals and objectives?
First off, I want to commend President Obama on his decision to
review the entire U.S. space policy. Like each of his predecessors
since President Eisenhower, the President realizes the importance of
space and is making space a priority.
Secondly, I feel that most of our space activities are pretty well
aligned with our national goals and objectives. Whether decision-makers
realize it or not, many of our goals and objectives depend on and are
enabled by space assets.
Thirdly, however, I feel I must touch upon a larger problem in
order to address this question. In order for the U.S. Government to
maximize the benefits of its investment in space, it needs to improve
the acquisition of those systems. They should be developed faster and
with more management discipline. We all know of space systems that have
been over budget and behind schedule.
Currently we are facing a number of gaps across the entire range of
the civilian and national security space systems. From human space
flight, to solar radiation detection, to next generation GPS, to
missile warning, to climate and weather monitoring, there are, or soon
will be gaps in coverage and capability that will hamper our ability to
derive benefits from space. These gaps will also force us to be reliant
on foreign space systems. I also would say that it is beyond a
coincidence that we are seeing such a systemic gap problem in so many
areas. Once we get back to better management of space systems, we can
deploy more systems more often and accrue more benefits from them.
Fourthly, we need to modernize the export control regime to allow
U.S. space companies to compete effectively in the global marketplace.
This is one area in which the U.S. already generates a positive trade
balance, but it could be significantly larger and would provide more
funds for U.S. companies to develop new jobs and innovations that help
both the domestic space industry and the broader U.S. economy. The
Space Report 2009 shows that the commercial sector now makes up 68
percent of the global space economy, so regulatory changes have the
potential to generate considerably more R&D funds than direct
investment by the government.
How important is the inspirational component of the Nation's space
activities, and what would be the most effective ways to use space
activities to motivate emerging generations of Americans to pursue
studies and careers in science and engineering?
In one word: essential.
Let me put this in perspective for the Members of the Subcommittee.
While most of you have vivid memories of the Apollo moon landings, I am
willing to bet you that the vast majority, if not all your staffers do
not. Let alone were they even alive when the landings occurred. The
post-Baby Boom generations do not have the memory of the Apollo, but
instead the Challenger or Columbia disasters.
Furthermore it is not like the 20 and 30 somethings of today do not
care about space. They do. These people are the most hi-tech infused
generation in the history of humanity. However, being active or even
somewhat participatory in the U.S. Government's space enterprises do
not feel like a viable option. Instead they are going to other places
where they can feel like they are making a difference. For example the
amount of young people who are involved with Burt Rutan's spaceship
developments on behalf of Virgin Galactic and future customers, the
early Gen Y workforce SpaceX has assembled or elsewhere like the Google
Lunar XPrize show that space is relevant and is important to young
adults.
I am also happy to report to the Subcommittee that The Space
Foundation employs a variety of programs and initiatives that educate
and raise awareness about the importance and impact of the space
industry:
Space Foundation education programs support teachers and Pre-K-12
students with standards-based curriculum that integrates science,
technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) into all content areas:
NEW HORIZONS Space Education Program, a community-
centered, science enrichment program that infuses STEM
education into a community through student enrichment programs,
teacher workshops, field trips, town-hall meetings, and
astronaut and space professional visits.
Space Discovery Institute, week-long, intensive,
graduate-level, in-residence courses that provide Pre-K-12
educators with space-related STEM education knowledge and
content that is instantly transferable to the classroom;
participants can earn continuing education credits, graduate
credits, or work toward a master's degree in multiple related
disciplines.
STARS Program (Science, Technology, and Academic
Readiness for Space), a hands-on science enrichment program
based on each school's academic needs.
National Science Standards Lesson Bank, free
downloadable Pre-K-12 national science standards-based lessons.
Teacher Liaisons, advocates for space science
education who: receive Space Foundation training and resources
to further integrate space into their classrooms; participate
in workshops and education programs at the National Space
Symposium; and can receive specialized Space Foundation and
NASA training with optional graduate-level credit, exclusive
professional development experiences with optional continuing
education credit, and special space-oriented student programs
created just for them.
Space Career Fair, an annual event in conjunction
with the National Space Symposium that provides students and
transitioning military personnel opportunities to network with
the largest employers in the space industry, to submit resumes,
and, occasionally, to interview for jobs.
Jack Swigert Aerospace Academy, an aerospace-focused
public middle school created and managed in conjunction with
Colorado Springs School District 11 that drives STEM
proficiency through a space-related curriculum, enhanced on-
site laboratories and learning opportunities, and involvement
with Space Foundation programs.
How well does the public understand the relevance of the Nation's space
activities to meeting national needs and realizing societal benefits?
Is there a need to ``get the message out'' on the relevance of those
space activities and the benefits to be derived from our space-related
investments? If so, how can that message be most effectively
communicated?
Not very well. Far too many audiences are made up of the ``space
choir.''
One of the ways the Space Foundation communicates this message to
the larger public is by means efforts such as the Space Foundation's
Space Certification Program, which enables companies to show that their
product has a space technology heritage. This provides benefits in both
directions, enabling the company to show off its high-tech space
pedigree and by illustrating in a tangible manner the way in which
space activity improves the lives of the ordinary consumer.
At the end of this month, your colleagues on the Aviation
Subcommittee will be holding a hearing on next generation navigation.
Undoubtedly there will be a major portion of this hearing focused on
satellite-based capabilities. I think this highlights just how almost
invisible and ubiquitous space has become.
I think the public at a very basic, fundamental level ``gets it'',
but not much beyond that. The public gets understandably frustrated
when they hear of budget and schedule problems. On the other hand, one
only has to look at the interest from the general public in the Mars
rovers, or the recent, and final, Hubble mission or to have witnessed
the thousands, young and old, that assembled in the Mojave desert in
2004 to witness the historic first private human space flight as
evidence that there is a thirst and an interest in what we do in space.
Honestly, I'm not sure a message campaign is the best way to move
forward. We live in an age of almost constant message barraging. From
pop-ads on the Internet, to seemingly constant political campaigning, I
think a ``command and control'' ad campaign would not do much. If
anything it could have the opposite reaction.
These younger generations are so technologically saturated, the
space industry needs to take advantage of that and utilize these new
channels to reach out and get kids excited about space. If kids get
excited about it, the rest of the public will follow. I would also
mention that you'd be surprised how much things like Facebook can help
spread enthusiasm about space. The peer-to-peer discussions and sharing
of information and enthusiasm for space is something that can surpass
an ad campaign. Witness astronaut Buzz Aldrin's recent use of web 2.0
technology when he teamed with rapper Snoop Dogg to create ``Rocket
Experience'' message about space.
For the larger public, not to sound flippant, but I think simply
executing missions successfully will do more to help than anything
else. I must paraphrase Arianespace CEO Jean Yves Le Gall, when he said
recently, ``launches speak louder than words.'' After all this is a
generation that is about achieving things that have never been done,
working as hard as necessary to achieve a breakthrough and talking less
and doing more.
Conclusion
I again want to express on behalf of the Space Foundation our deep
appreciation for allowing us to come before you today. I stand ready to
answer any your questions.
Thank you.
Biography for Patti Grace Smith
Patti Grace Smith served as Associate Administrator for Commercial
Space Transportation for the Federal Aviation Administration, U.S.
Department of Transportation, where for eleven years (ending February
2008) she headed the line of business responsible for licensing,
regulating, and promoting the U.S. commercial space transportation
industry. Smith joined the Department of Transportation in 1994. Smith
has over 28 years of experience and knowledge of the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC), the Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA) and the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT).
In an era of unprecedented private sector progress toward
commercial human space flight, Smith worked hard to foster an
environment where safety always comes first and innovation can
flourish. During her career at the FAA and DOT, Smith was instrumental
in the growth and change that the U.S. commercial launch industry has
experienced, facilitating both technological and infrastructure
developments and initiating and fostering greater cooperation and
partnerships between aviation and space functions in the Agency. During
her service at the FAA, key milestones were achieved that include the
Mojave Air and Spaceport becoming the first inland Commercial Spaceport
licensed by the Agency, and the launch of the X-Prize winning, historic
SpaceShip One, a launch licensed by the FAA. Smith also oversaw the
development of rules for human space flight mandated by congressional
passage of the Commercial Space Launch Amendments Act of 2004.
Under Smith's leadership at the FAA Office of Commercial Space
Transportation, the FAA became the recognized global leader in private
human space flight. Smith initiated and helped forge partnerships with
the Air Force on common launch safety standards, and kept safety,
regulatory matters and insurance issues constantly in the public forum.
She worked closely with FAA lines of business to draw on aviation
expertise where appropriate to space issues and to address the impact
of space flight on the National Airspace System. Smith was named by
Space News as one of the top ten people in the U.S. space sector.
Smith also held positions in the private sector at the National
Association of Broadcasters, Westinghouse Broadcasting Corporation, and
Sheridan Radio Network; and in government at the Department of Defense
and the Federal Communications Commission; and the Senate Commerce
Committee. Smith is currently an aerospace consultant with Patti Grace
Smith Consulting working with Virgin Galactic (The Virgin Group), CSSI,
Inc., the Tauri Group and a number of other aerospace companies. She is
on the board of SpaceDev (now Sierra Nevada), Space Foundation,
American Astronautical Society, the American Bar Association's Air and
Space Law Forum Board; the X Prize Advisory Committee Board, and the
Conrad Foundation.
She is the recipient of numerous awards for her accomplishments in
communications, external relations, and commercial space
transportation. She is a regular speaker at a number of industry
events.
Chairwoman Giffords. Thank you, Ms. Smith. Ms. Myers,
please.
STATEMENT OF MS. DEBORAH ADLER MYERS, GENERAL MANAGER, SCIENCE
CHANNEL, DISCOVERY COMMUNICATIONS
Ms. Myers. Thank you so much for inviting me here today. It
is a great honor.
Since we are a media company, today, I am going to be
sharing some video clips with you, so that we can help bring
the discussions to life. Our audience loves space programming,
and I think it is because space captures imaginations and
allows people to dream, really to think outside themselves, and
marvel at the unknown.
Discovery is the brainchild of John Hendricks who, 24 years
ago, believed that Americans would watch a network devoted
entirely to programming that captures people's innate sense of
curiosity of the world. He was personally inspired by a
lifelong fascination and a love of space. Well, today,
Discovery Communications, and especially, the team I am proud
to lead as General Manager of the Science Channel, is rallying
around President Obama's call to restore science to its
rightful place. That call to action was absolutely music to our
ears.
There is a barrier simply in the word science. Many of us
struggled with science classes and children, and the cliche
that we struggle against constantly is that science is dry and
it is boring. And the key to developing a larger audience is
igniting people's imagination, and encouraging them to be
endlessly curious, because science really is creative. It
improves your life every single day.
So, here on the Science Channel, we are experimenting with
brand new ways to immerse and make people excited about
science, and to create content and programs that immerse
people, exactly what you were saying, on air, online, in
Facebook, on Twitter, bringing all this great content to where
people will consume it, and connect and explore it. We are
developing alternate reality games, and we are even bringing
this content into our classrooms. We are calling this Science
360, and space is a really important part of this.
We have hosts and we have experts that include stars in
their field, like Dr. James Garvin, who is the Chief Scientist
at NASA Goddard, Dr. Michio Kaku, who is the co-creator of the
string theory. They are our popular hosts, and people love the
programming, when they bring space sciences and physics to
life.
And we also have a campaign that I would like to share with
you, called the Brains of Science, and it features role models
like astronaut Buzz Aldrin, who seek to inspire a whole new
generation, and get them excited about why they choose their
careers, especially Buzz, as an astronaut. Take a look.
[Video]
So, our job is to find great science communicators in space
and science, and help them bring their message to life. But on
top of that, we are also seeking out ``A'' list celebrities who
have a passion for science, and can bring even more people to
the genre, because they bring in a larger ground. Whoopi
Goldberg, for example, who is passionate about inspiring a love
of science and learning in women and young girls. She is
creating a science game on-air and online.
And we reach out to science organizations that have
traditionally worked in their own silos, and we are working to
bring them together. For example, we came to NASA with a big
idea. Academy Award-winning actor Morgan Freeman has this
lifelong passion for space, and he is fascinated by the great
mysteries of the universe. So, this new alliance between Morgan
Freeman and NASA is resulting in an eight part series that we
are very proud to be launching in April, and this is executive
produced and hosted by Morgan Freeman.
[Video]
Space programming is one of our most popular genres that we
run on the network, and we sprinkle this content into a lot of
our programming. When we cut back on space coverage, we hear
about it immediately from our viewers, and boy, are they vocal.
In fact, so many people crave this information that we devote
an entire week of it in our annual Space Week, which rates
highly on-air and online, and people write in and Twitter in,
and tell us all the time.
NASA also played a critical role in Discovery Education's
3M Young Scientist Challenge. They hosted this year's annual
middle school competition, and this a wonderful challenge that
is designed to inspire the next generation of great science
communicators. Will Smith is the producer of our special on the
Young Scientist Challenge, and he personally produced this spot
to run across in our schools. Take a look.
[Video]
He was wonderful to work with, and not many people know
that he was accepted to MIT. He wanted to be an engineer, and
he is passionate about space and engineering, and finding new
ways to get young people involved in considering that it is
school to be smart, and ways to go into careers in space and in
science.
We also bring original content directly into our schools
nationwide through our Discovery Education division. Discovery
Education Streaming offers classrooms thousands of science
videos and digital content that teachers can easily integrate
right into their classroom lectures, and they are able to
customize the way that they are able to teach kids. Are they
better to learn through hearing or reading, or bringing things
to life? It is a wonderful tool.
So science and space, it is alive, it is optimistic, and it
is the future. So, I want to express my sincere thanks for
allowing Science Channel and Discovery Communications to show
you our passion for space and all genres, really, of science.
We are proud to answer the call and be a champion for this
critical movement to bring science back to its rightful place
in the United States.
Thank you, and I am happy, later on, to answer any
questions, because there is so much more to tell you about.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Myers follows:]
Prepared Statement of Deborah Adler Myers
Chairwoman Giffords and other distinguished Members of the
Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics, thank you for your invitation to
testify today on this important topic. I'm proud to represent Discovery
Communications and discuss our efforts to further the excitement and
endless possibilities of science in general, and space in particular.
Discovery is the brainchild of John Hendricks, who, in 1985,
believed that Americans would watch a network devoted entirely to
documentary and non-fiction programming that captures people's innate
sense of curiosity of the world. He was personally inspired by a
lifelong fascination and love of space--he grew up in Huntsville,
Alabama, home of NASA's George C. Marshall Space Flight Center,
watching in awe as man achieved the impossible.
Today, Discovery Communications, and especially the team I'm proud
to lead as General Manager of Science Channel, is rallying around the
call to action issued by President Obama on April 27th. He challenged
our nation to restore science to its rightful place because science is
more essential for our prosperity, our security, our health, our
environment, and our quality of life than it has ever been before.
That call to action was music to our ears. For the last year, we
have been working on a four-part strategy to get people of all ages
excited about the sciences--especially space and its related fields.
The strategy includes:
1) Experimenting with various ways to make science exciting
and entertaining;
2) Finding and training strong science communicators including
the ``rock stars'' of science and pop culture and training a
new generation of science communicators;
3) Aggregating science by bringing together traditionally
siloed organizations to create partnerships and exchange
information;
4) Delivering all of this content and information in a way
that allows adults and kids to access it--on air, online, in
gaming, on phones and digital devices not yet created and, in
schools.
The ability to connect our science programming on all these
platforms is what we call Science 360+. I'll go into each of
these in a little more depth.
The first part of this strategy is to reinvent how we talk about
the field and make it entertaining. There is a barrier simply in the
word ``science''--many of us struggled with science classes as
children, and in fact, studies show scientific engagement among
students dips in middle school. The cliche we struggle against is that
science is boring and dry and something I might not understand. The key
to bringing it to a larger audience is sharing the great stories and
creativity of science. We want to ignite the public's imagination,
engage them in the quest for answers, and encourage them to embark on
journeys to solve scientific puzzles. We bring science to life by
making it relevant to people's everyday lives, celebrating the
ingenuity in all of us.
Science Channel's mission is to be the creative magnet for all
people--adults and kids who share a passion for innovation and the
sciences--from space, technology and engineering to physics and the
Earth and natural sciences. Our job is to keep experimenting to find
the best, most creative ways to bring these genres, stories and
challenges to life by entertaining and inspiring. We believe that if
you capture people's imaginations, they will connect and engage.
The second part of the strategy is finding and training strong
science communicators, those who have a gift for making science
accessible and relatable. They make the hard stuff easy to understand
and have an enthusiasm for getting people engaged. They are our hosts
and experts--the rock stars of science, like Jim Garvin, chief
scientist at NASA Goddard who participates in many of our space
programs; Dr. Michio Kaku, co-creator of String Theory who explains
black holes, time and the physics of the universe; and Dr. Basil Singer
who takes us on space adventures. Sometimes they share their stories in
short-form segments like our Brains of Science Campaign, which features
people from all the sciences talking about their work and why they
entered their chosen field. It's a great way to get people excited
about different careers in science.
To bring an even larger audience to the Science Channel, we seek
out ``A-list'' celebrities who have a passion for science and space and
want to share that passion with an audience and particularly kids.
Whoopi Goldberg, who is passionate about inspiring a love of science in
women and young girls, is doing a trivia-based game show and a
companion online game that can be played simultaneously at home. We're
also working with Morgan Freeman, who has a love of space, and Will
Smith, who was accepted to MIT before he decided to pursue his acting
career. Celebrities are just one of the ways we bring new audiences to
our networks. We entice new viewers with credible, enthusiastic
celebrities and hold their attention with the entertaining information
we present.
In addition to the current superstars of science and Hollywood
celebrities, Science Channel is actively seeking out and training new
science personalities. We created a science talent school where we take
rising stars in the major fields of science, including Dr. Jennifer
Eigenbrode from NASA and Dr. Hakeem Oluseyi from the Florida Institute
of Technology, and groom them to be science television communicators.
We will then use them throughout our programming and in some instances
create series or specials around their area of expertise. Currently we
are training 10 people a year and we hope to expand the program.
The third part of our strategy is partnerships, which are
critically important to our success. Half of our battle is keeping
track of all the amazing work going on around the world so we can bring
our audience breakthroughs and innovations in all fields of science.
Reaching out to science organizations that have been individual silos
and working to bring them together and share their work with the public
is a big priority for us. We work with research centers, universities,
science media, scientists and leading organizations--anyone who wants
the public to understand and celebrate their work. Our partnership with
NASA is an example of a success story.
We came to NASA with a big idea. Academy Award-winning actor Morgan
Freeman has a lifelong passion for space. He's fascinated by the great
mysteries of the universe and trying to find answers to questions that
have been asked for all of civilization, like: Is there other life in
the universe? How did we get here? Is time travel possible? We wanted
to bring Mr. Freeman's passion for the topic to our audience and asked
NASA if they would host us for a day-long brainstorm about their
current research and planned missions. They discussed with us the
profound implications of what their upcoming missions could tell us
about our world and ourselves. The result of that conversation is an
eight-part series we're launching in April hosted and executive
produced by Morgan Freeman.
NASA also played a critical role in our Discovery Education 3M
Young Scientist Challenge, an annual competition for middle school
students designed to inspire the next generation of great science
communicators. The finals of last year's competition were held at NASA
Goddard Space Flight Center. The inspiration our students felt when
they worked for several days inside NASA alongside working scientists
will forever change their lives. The event was also filmed by Science
Channel for a television special, executive produced by Overbrook
Entertainment, which aired earlier this year.
Science Channel also had the privilege of partnering with NASA to
film their amazing achievements and then bring them to the viewer at
home. Together we created two live television specials in the past
year, tied to their Mars and Hubble missions. In addition to
traditional televised programs, these specials also spoke to audiences
in media formats that they prefer, with extensive web sites that
allowed people to explore at their own pace and new media tools,
including NASA scientists posting Twitter updates and answering
viewers' questions in real time as the actual missions unfolded. We
also aired short-form content throughout the day with mission updates.
Space is one of many genres that we program on Science Channel, and
our viewers tell us that it is one of their favorite subjects. Beyond
our anecdotal evidence, our ratings research confirms that our viewers
love this genre--last quarter, space programming rated 25 percent
higher than our network average. Our television shows cover a wide
range of space and exploration topics--from space travel to string
theory and wormholes to black holes. We start from the Big Bang
beginning and go right to the edge of what we know is possible in the
future. We've brought back classics like COSMOS and created our own
original series like When We Left Earth and Meteorite Men.
When we decrease our space coverage we hear about it immediately
from our viewers, so space-related topics and segments are also woven
into many other series and specials. In fact, so many people crave
space programming that we devote an entire week of our evening
television schedule to our annual Space Week, which rates highly on
air, and online. We launched a new series during Space Week this year
called Exodus Earth, where we explored what would happen if for
whatever reason we decided to leave Earth. The series looked at where
would we go, how would we live and what would be waiting for us. At
Science Channel we constantly experiment with different kinds of story-
telling devices to bring topics to life.
We're also bringing our content to teachers and students. Reaching
tomorrow's scientists today is critical, so Discovery Communications'
Education Division, which combines scientifically proven, standards-
based digital media and a dynamic user community to empower teachers to
improve student achievement, has created services to engage students in
scientific inquiry.
Utilizing America's broadband network, Discovery Education
streaming, Discovery's flagship service, offers American classrooms
thousands of science videos, delivered via the Internet, correlated to
state standards, and in three- to five-minute clips that teachers can
easily integrate into their classroom lessons. In addition, Discovery
Education also produces specific digital content services for both
elementary and middle school classrooms, called Discovery Education
Science, which propels school curricula with standards-based digital
content, virtual labs, simulations, and more. Together, these services
help educators encourage exploration, stimulate critical thinking, and
deepen understanding of science.
While the promise of digital content to positively impact student
engagement in science is great, any plan to integrate digital content
or other educational technologies into classroom curriculum is doomed
to failure without ongoing professional development, supported by
school districts. Discovery Education works directly with school
districts to provide professional development strategies that model
best practices: namely, strategies for providing students with
consistent feedback, utilizing cooperative learning structures,
embedding digital content into instruction, and promoting the creation
of content for the web in an effort to better engage 21st century
students in science instruction.
Advisory board
Underpinning all that I've discussed here today is the world-class
board of advisors led by our Chairman John Hendricks. Members include
representatives from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the
National Science Teachers Association, the Florida Institute of
Technology, Hudson Alpha Institute for Biotechnology, The Franklin
Institute, National Academy of Sciences, Electronic Arts, Popular
Science, and, of course, NASA. Our advisors play a critical role in
making sure we know about amazing research and technologies. They help
us find new science communicators. They assist us with developing
programming and they help us shape our efforts to do even more in the
areas of science literacy and education.
In conclusion, I want to express my sincere thanks for allowing
Science Channel and Discovery Communications to show you our passion
for space and all genres of science. I think our audience loves space
programming because it's a quest to discover the great mysteries of our
time. It allows people to dream, to think outside themselves, to wonder
about what else there is in the universe and to marvel at the beauty
and fragility of the world in which we live.
Science isn't just something you learn in school--it's alive, it's
optimistic, it's the future. We're proud to answer President Obama's
call and to be a champion for this critical movement to bring science
back to its rightful place in the United States. Thank you.
Biography for Deborah Adler Myers
As General Manager, Science Channel, Debbie Myers leads the
development, production, scheduling, research, marketing, digital and
communications efforts, with direct responsibility for driving the
revenue and ratings for the brand. In her role as Executive Vice
President of programming for Discovery Emerging Networks, Myers also
spearheads the development, production and programming units for
Investigation Discovery, Military Channel and HD Theater, some of the
fastest-growing networks in cable. Charged with commissioning and
creating brand-defining series and specials for all four networks,
Myers also leads the effort to attract top scientists, experts and
personalities to appear on air and online.
Since joining the Emerging Networks group in March 2008, Myers has
launched more than 40 new series, including 20 for Science Channel, and
secured major programming deals with Morgan Freeman, Whoopi Goldberg
and Paula Zahn.
Myers first joined Discovery Communications in June 2005 and has
been responsible for thousands of hours of content across all of
Discovery's networks, including the launch of TLC's franchise Little
People, Big World. As Vice President of production and then Senior Vice
President of programming, daytime and fringe, for TLC, Myers oversaw
the launches of LA Ink, Say Yes to the Dress, Big Medicine, Take Home
Chef and Take Home Handyman and managed continuing series including
What Not to Wear, Miami Ink and A Baby Story.
Prior to joining Discovery, Myers ran her own production company,
Aha! Entertainment, where she created series and pilots for NBC,
Paramount, VH-1 and 20th Television. Myers was also instrumental in
launching several cable networks, including E! Entertainment and
Oxygen. She served for eight years as Vice President of programming and
development at E!, where she created and ran 17 signature series,
including the Emmy Award-winning Talk Soup and E! News.
Myers is the former Governor of the Production Executives group of
the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences.
Chairwoman Giffords. Thank you, Ms. Myers. We appreciate
that. Well, speaking of new media and Twittering, and MySpace,
and blogging, one of the best space technology folks, that we
are going to hear from next, is Miles O'Brien.
STATEMENT OF MR. MILES O'BRIEN, JOURNALIST
Mr. O'Brien. I have been tempted to tweet this whole time.
I have been tempted to tweet, but I probably should pay
attention.
Madam Chairwoman, it is nice of you to invite an unemployed
journalist to this event. Of course, it is harder and harder to
find employed journalists, especially in my beat. I have been
covering space for more than 17 years now. I am a pilot and an
airplane owner, and I come to the space beat as an enthusiastic
supporter of all things that fly, well, maybe not mosquitoes.
I appreciate the adventure that is inherent in exploring a
frontier. In fact, I spent several years trying to convince
NASA to give me a ride in the Shuttle to the Space Station, and
I did have a deal that we would have announced about a week or
so after the safe landing of Columbia, in February of 2003.
Unfortunately, that was a different story.
In all, I have covered about three dozen Shuttle missions,
including John Glenn's flight, with no less than Walter
Cronkite as my co-anchor. And I got to ask him a lot of
important questions, like would you like a little more cream in
that, sir? Actually, when I first met him, we were talking
about how we would cover this mission together, and I made the
mistake of telling him he didn't need to worry about the
Shuttle, that I would handle that, and all he had to do was
regale us with tales about the Mercury 7 days. He was visibly
upset, and he asked me to get him a report on every Shuttle
mission, all the who, what, when, where, why, whether the
mission succeeded or not, and I asked him if he wanted that for
all 94 missions at that time. And his eyes were wide open. He
said there have been 94 missions? And to paraphrase Lyndon
Johnson, if we have lost Walter Cronkite, we have lost the
Nation.
Now, some of this has to do with novelty. Lindbergh's
flight was news. When I flew the Atlantic in a little plane a
few years ago, no one cared, except for my wife. John Glenn's
first mission was news, and certainly, the intrepid crew of
Apollo 11 was the obvious lead story for days 40 years ago
today.
But I just came last night from covering the launch of the
127th Shuttle mission, and this room, of course, is a choir,
but who outside of this room knows what they are doing, or who
is aboard the Space Shuttle right now, or that there is a
mission at all? Now, part of the problem is NASA has served up
a mission that seems mundane, I emphasize seems, no more
interesting than watching airliners depart a national airport,
and in fact, the Shuttle was sold to Congress with the promise
that it would make space travel cheap and as easy as airline
travel. And, as if to make it all seem real, even though it
wasn't, the Agency sort of went out of its way to make it look
ho-hum. Then, of course, Challenger happened, and the story
changed.
But there is also another factor at work here. Apollo is
NASA's greatest accomplishment, to be sure. It is also its
biggest curse, in a sense. It was a story that sold itself, and
in fact, the media frenzy at the time was so great, in those
heady Moon race days, that the Agency really had to build some
walls and moats, and hire PR people who were more like the
palace guard. And unfortunately, a lot of that culture remains
in place. And that is aided and abetted by the astronauts who
live in the palace, and only open the doors and let us in for
brief audiences, usually on their own limited terms.
Now, the sad irony is, these people are some of the most
amazing people I have met. There is even twin commanders on the
Shuttle, I hear, and if they would just get out of the palace,
and let the public in a little more, I think they would sell
the program better than any piece of hardware we are latching
onto the Space Station.
Which leads me to the guys and gals who make the hardware,
the engineers. God love them. They make the magic happen, but
they just don't get the communication thing. The public affairs
mission is simply not a priority within NASA. Matter of fact,
it isn't even on the list of requirements for missions. Forty
years ago, they were fighting to keep the cameras off the
Apollo spacecraft. After all, they simply just add weight.
There was nothing in the mission requirement for it.
Now, imagine if that thinking had prevailed. It might not
have prevailed, but that some kind of debate rages on, as they
are designing the Orion capsule. Public affairs should always
be a mission requirement, and a high priority requirement. And
I know that this committee has recognized this. NASA
Authorization Bill of 2008 gets into this issue of
participatory exploration, and how important that is.
We have got to take that first step and go further with it.
You know, the TV cameras are worth their weight in gold,
because they let the public participate in the exploration. And
let us not forget who is paying the bills here. You know, you
leave the public behind, there won't be any missions, much less
requirements for missions.
Which brings me to some of the places where NASA is doing a
good job engaging the public. You know, think of those little
rovers, Spirit and Opportunity, explore Mars, making the
Energizer Bunny look like a piker. Now, this is an example
where the scientists and engineers have natural common ground
with the PR folks. The images from the other worlds feed the
scientists as well as the public interest, and it happens
simultaneously. How brilliant is that?
You know, this all started, you will recall, with
Pathfinder years ago, the first big Internet webaganza, if you
will. Average people could see the images as they came down
from Mars at the same time as the scientists at the Jet
Propulsion Lab. They were peeking over the scientists' shoulder
as they were doing their job exploring. That is heady stuff.
That is engaging.
That trend has continued. Phoenix became the first
spacecraft to tweet. It was the idea of a former colleague of
mine, Veronica McGregor. She is at JPL now. She got the idea
from, where else, her kids, as a way to let people know about
the landing during the Memorial Day weekend. It happened on a
Sunday, Memorial Day. She just thought it might be one way to
make sure people knew it happened. Well, she got a tiger by the
tail. The thing went viral, tens of thousands of followers,
tons of detailed questions from space geeks the world over, but
it broadened beyond the choir very quickly, and that is the
magic of this new media, is that in an exponential fashion,
friends tell friends, and on it goes, and suddenly, the public
is engaged in a mission they may not have heard anything about.
And were interested, with questions that Veronica, frankly,
said were better than she got from the mainstream media, I must
confess.
Now, to their credit, in Houston, they saw this, and they
saw how potent it is, and astronaut Mike Massimino became the
first person to tweet from space, in between space walks to fix
the Hubble Space Telescope. Now, that is a giant leap for
webkind.
And speaking of Hubble, the granddaddy of all missions
where science is also a good PR message, look what happened
when NASA tried to cancel that mission to repair Hubble.
Engagement led to anger, and ultimately activism, and it
changed things.
So, that brings me to my final point. The agency is
dispersed geographically by centers of expertise, by geography.
It doesn't really speak with one voice. It doesn't have a
cohesive public relations strategy. Public affairs here in
Washington needs to have more authority to direct these far-
flung PR operations, which kind of answer to their flowcharts
in a balkanized fashion, and frankly, PR, public affairs here
in Washington, needs a budget. The current budget is zero right
now. And you get what you pay for.
There is no doubt the mission is the message, ultimately,
and NASA needs to be taking us places where we haven't been
before, and that will capture the fancy of a jaded public. But
the message is also part of the mission, and it should never be
an afterthought.
Thank you for inviting me.
[The prepared statement of Mr. O'Brien follows:]
Prepared Statement of Miles O'Brien
Nice of you to invite an unemployed journalist to testify--of
course it is harder and harder to find employed journalists--especially
on my beat.
I have been covering space for more than 17 years now . . . I am a
pilot and airplane owner--and come to the space beat as an enthusiastic
supporter of all things that fly--and the adventure that is inherent in
exploring a frontier. In fact, I spent several years trying to convince
NASA to give me a ride to the space station--and we had a deal--that we
would have announced a week or so after Columbia would have landed in
February 2003.
In all, I have covered about three dozen Shuttle missions--
including John Glenn's flight--with Walter Cronkite as my co-anchor. I
got to ask him a lot of important questions--like would you like a
little more cream in your coffee sir?
Actually, when I first met him--and we were talking about how we
would cover the mission together.
I made the mistake of telling him he didn't need to worry about the
details of the Shuttle--I would handle that--and all he needed to do
was regale us with tales of the Mercury 7 days--he got very upset--and
asked me to get him a report on every Shuttle mission--all the who what
when where why's a hows--I asked him if he wanted that for all 94
missions at that time . . . he said greatly surprised ``there've been
94 missions?''
Paraphrasing Lyndon Johnson--if we have lost Walter Cronkite--we
have lost the rest of the Nation.
Some of this is novelty--Lindbergh's flight was news--but when I
flew the Atlantic in a little plane a few summers ago--no one cared.
John Glenn's first mission was news--and certainly the intrepid crew of
Apollo 11 was the obvious lead story for days--but I just flew in last
night form covering the 127th shuttle launch--and who knows who is
aboard and what they are doing up there?
Part of the problem is NASA has served up a mission that seems
mundane--no more interesting than watching airliners depart from
National Airport. And in fact, the Shuttle was sold to Congress with
the promise it would make space travel as cheap and easy as airline
travel--and as if to make it all seem real (even though it wasn't)--the
Agency went out of its way to make it look ho hum--before Challenger.
But there is another factor at work here. Apollo is NASA's greatest
accomplishment to be sure--but it is also its biggest curse. It was,
after all, a story that sold itself--and in fact the media frenzy was
so great in those heady moon race years that the Agency had to build
some walls and moats--and hire PR people who were more like the palace
guard.
A lot of that remains in place--and that is aided and abetted by
the astronauts--who live in that palace and only open the doors and let
us in for brief audiences--usually on their own limited terms. The sad
irony is these people are some of the most amazing people I have met--
and if they would just get out of the palace--or let the public in a
little more--they would sell the program better than any piece of
hardware they might be latching onto the space station.
Which leads me to the guys and gals who make the hardware--the
engineers--god love them--they make the magic happen--but they just
don't get the communication thing. The public affairs mission is simply
not a priority. Matter of fact it isn't even on the list of
requirements. Forty years ago, they were fighting to keep cameras off
the Apollo spacecraft--after they simply add weight--and do nothing for
their mission requirements. Imagine if that thinking had prevailed . .
..
Well it may not have prevailed--but the debate is still alive and
well as they design the Orion capsule.
Public affairs should always be a mission requirement--and a high
priority requirement. The TV cameras are worth their weight in gold
because they let the public participate in the exploration. And let's
not forget who pays the bills. Leave the public behind and there won't
be any missions--much less requirements.
Which brings me to some of the places where NASA goes a good job
engaging the public--think of those little Rovers Spirit and
Opportunity--still on Mars making the energizer bunny look like a
piker. This is an a example when the scientists and the engineers do
not have some natural common ground. The images from other worlds--feed
the scientists--as well as the public interest.
This all started with Pathfinder years ago--the first big ``web-
aganza''--if you will--average people could see the images at the same
time as the Martians at the Jet Propulsion Lab. Peeking over the
scientists shoulders as they explore! What heady stuff! Talk about
engaging!
That trend has continued--Phoenix became the first spacecraft to
tweet--and quickly became one of the first twitter sensations--my
former colleague Veronica McGregror at JPL got the idea from her kids--
of course--as a way to let people know about the landing on a Memorial
Day Sunday--she got a tiger by the tail--and went viral--with many tens
of thousands of followers as fast as a speeding spacecraft--there were
tons of very detailed questions from the space geeks--but soon it
broadened--as the choir started telling their friends. The public was
engaged--exponentially.
To their credit--in Houston they saw this how potent--and astronaut
Mike Massimino became the first person to tweet from space in between
space walks to fix the Hubble Space Telescope. A giant leap for web-
kind.
And speaking of Hubble--the granddaddy of all missions where the
science--is the best PR message--and look what happened when NASA tried
to cancel that final repair mission--engagement led to anger and
ultimately activism.
Which brings me to my final point--the Agency, dispersed
geographically as well by centers of expertise and excellence--does not
speak with one voice as it should. Public Affairs here in Washington
needs more authority to direct the far flung PR operations--and frankly
they need a budget--which currently is 0. You do get what you pay for.
There is no doubt the mission is the message--and NASA needs to be
taking us places where we have not been before to capture the fancy of
a jaded public.
But the message is also part of the mission--it should never be an
afterthought.
Discussion
Improving NASA's Communication With the Public
Chairwoman Giffords. Thank you, Mr. O'Brien.
At this point, we are going to begin our first round of
questions, and the chair will recognize herself for five
minutes. I will keep my question, actually, down to one,
because we have several representatives of the majority that
represent NASA centers, so let me be brief.
It was not by coincidence that we had our first two
panelists talk about the how and the why, why this is such an
important aspect of who we are as Americans, and who we are, in
terms of policy-makers and people that really care about our
national interests.
The second part of our panel, we heard about the how do we
attempt, how do we do a good job, or hopefully do a good job at
getting that message out to the American people.
So, my question is, in terms of Members of Congress,
specifically, what are the things that we can and should be
doing, besides someone like myself, a single Member, who was
going into the cloakroom a few hours ago, and saw the Tyra
Banks show on television, switched it to the NASA station, to
make sure that my fellow Members could watch the coverage of
the fortieth anniversary, instead of watching the Tyra Banks
show while we were in between votes, and also, the White House.
What are the steps that the White House could be doing? We
talked a little bit about that, but in terms of really making
this relevant to the American people? And General Lyles, let us
start with you.
General Lyles. Madam Chairwoman, let me, I am glad you
asked that specific question. I would like to sort of piggyback
off of Miles' comments and also Debbie's.
One of the major things I think the Congress could do
almost immediately is to make sure that the civil space
agencies, and particularly, NASA, understand that
communication, that PR, that public affairs, that marketing are
okay, that to some extent, they are a form of communication.
They are certainly a form of education, and both of those, to
me, are seeds for inspiration.
Let me give you the context of why I say that. I serve on
the NASA Advisory Council, and for the last two or three years,
the Advisory Council, at different times, in conversation with
the NASA Administrator, almost begged the Administrator and the
Agency to find ways they can better get the word out about
everything that NASA does. And the immediate response was
Congress has told me I can't do that.
There is language, probably appropriation language, that
precludes NASA from spending any money on anything that looks
like marketing. I take a broad definition of the word
marketing, because to me, it does equate to communication and
education, and all the things that Debbie and Miles were
talking about. I think one immediate thing is to look to see if
there are restrictive language, even if it is a perception of
restrictive language, that precludes NASA from doing the kind
of things that Miles so expertly pointed out, I think that
would be very, very helpful.
Chairwoman Giffords. Thank you. Ms. Smith, please.
Ms. Smith. I definitely think that the public affairs and
the messaging is extremely important. I think, having been in a
government agency myself, I think that one of the things that
agencies often are conflicted about is, especially those that
are regulators, such as FAA, the conflict exists about how can
I carry out that message? Is it possible to carry out that
message, and at the same time, promote and encourage the
industry that I am responsible for?
My old office, the Office of Commercial Space
Transportation, I would say, did an excellent job in drawing
the bright line between safety and promotion, but recognizing
that in order for us to foster the further growth and
development of our industries, we have to promote them, and
there is nothing wrong with the government doing that, as long
as it understands what its principal mission is, and in our
case, it was to protect the uninvolved public.
I also think that, in terms of what Congress can do, one of
the challenges that I faced in that role was talking to Members
of Congress and their staffs, who very straightforwardly and
honestly said, you know, this is not necessarily a bread and
butter issue for me. I don't hear from my constituents on it in
the same way.
I think that Congress has an obligation to make that
message come alive, and to recognize that if it affects the
economy and the national security of our nation, then yes, it
is a bread and butter issue.
So, what are the ways to bring it right down front for the
constituent? And I think, looking at where we are right now in
the world of space and the United States, we really are at a
crossroads, I think. The need for a real clarion call that
takes us forward into the future, and we all have a role to
play in that. Congress has a role. The executive branch has a
role. We, as citizens, have a role, and those who are business
people in the industry, to carry that message forward.
So, I think, first and foremost, making it a bread and
butter issue. It is. It affects you in your daily lives. It is
a part of our national economy and national security. Carrying
that message forward in a more prominent way, I think will go a
long way to engage those constituents who are very, very
interested in this, but may not know just how to bring it
forward.
Chairwoman Giffords. Okay. Ms. Smith, I am going to end
with you. I would like to hear from the other panelists, but I
really want to get to the other Members here. So, maybe if you
have particular points, you can weave them into your answers to
their questions.
Congressman Olson.
How Should NASA Communicate Its Contributions to Society?
Mr. Olson. Well, thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I will kind
of follow up. We didn't plan this before, but I also, I would
like to ask Ms. Myers and Mr. O'Brien for the first question,
and if we have time, General Lyles and Ms. Smith, but it is
right along that same line of communication.
How do we communicate how beneficial NASA has been to our
society, from a technological, from a national security
perspective, and from an inspirational perspective? And you all
talked about what Congress and the government can do, but one
thing I find when I meet with constituent groups, we just had a
group up here yesterday, from all the NASA centers, you know,
some employees. And they all ask what could I do? What can I do
to help you, or to help make sure that the American public
understands how important this is for our future?
Ms. Myers and Mr. O'Brien, I would like to give you the
first crack at that. What can we tell our constituents? What
could they do to make a difference?
Ms. Myers. I think part of it, sorry, part of this is
really underscoring the importance of matching up national
agencies with private businesses, private sectors, so that we
can figure out together how do we tell these great stories? So,
it is putting those partnerships together, and encouraging
those partnerships to happen, so that we can help work with
people to understand what the stories are about, and how best
to share that with the public.
Depending on the goals, depending on the type of stories,
it is hero stories. It is talking about people who go into
space, and the dangers that are there. That makes them stronger
and braver as heroes. It is trying to find the way to make it
relevant into people's lives. It is, when you have all this
great information, it is that partnership with the people and
the companies and the agencies and the journalists, and the
talent that can help bring that to life.
Another part is to find great science communicators. We
have started an experiment called Talent School, where we have
gone out, and we have worked with different agencies in space
and science, and we have found people that are really smart,
they have the twinkle in the eye. They have a great stage
presence about them. But how do we take what they do, and teach
them how to connect with viewers at home, and teach them how to
put that language into ways that resonate with everyday people,
so everyday people care about it? So, I think it is inspiring
people, inspiring people to work together with companies and
with broadcasters and with journalists that can help tell their
story in the best way possible, because they are great stories.
Mr. Olson. Mr. O'Brien.
Mr. O'Brien. You know, I think the irony is, at 40 years
after the launch of Apollo 11, NASA suffers from a bit of
timidity when it comes to unleashing the message.
Now, they have a natural legion of foot soldiers,
evangelizers. Everybody I meet who is involved in space is
deeply passionate about what they do, love what they do. They
are committed to their jobs in ways most people are not. And
unfortunately, if they attempt to blog about it or tweet about
it, they get shut down. This happens all the time, because the
concern is that they will be off message.
It is important to empower the Agency, and thus, its foot
soldiers, to know that they can be a part of this. If a flight
controller wants to tweet and let her social network in on what
is going on inside mission control, assuming we are not, you
know, in some sort of mission-critical situation that would
cause danger to somebody, why not empower her to do that? But
instead, the message is you can't.
So, I think what Congress can do is, to the extent that
they can streamline the rules for NASA and make it easier for
them to do marketing, but also, to the extent that they can
avoid the tendency to get on the phone every time something
comes across the bow, that might offend somebody and somebody's
constituency, because what that does is it cows the Agency. And
they need to be empowered, too, because if you unleashed the
power of that workforce, and allowed them to spread the word,
we could just stand by and watch them win the country over.
Mr. Olson. Just a little food for thought, based on the
comments earlier, about how NASA could market itself. I had one
of the constituents yesterday, it is not legal for the
government, but a very interesting idea, what if we put a
little NASA sticker on every product that was influenced, or
had some benefit coming from space.
You would look around this room. Every piece of electronic
gear would have a little NASA sticker on it, and somehow, we
need to communicate that to the general public.
And I appreciate your time.
Chairwoman Giffords. Thank you, Congressman Olson. Next, we
are going to hear from Parker Griffith, who represents Marshall
Space Center.
Mr. Griffith. The comments are interesting. You know, the
day after the revolution, the revolutionaries become the
establishment, and I appreciate Mr. O'Brien's comments. And I
think we are suffering from that right now in our space
program.
I am from Huntsville, Alabama. Took care of many of the
space scientists that came in from Germany, so we have a real
dedication there. Mr. Hendricks, we are grateful to him, in no
uncertain terms.
In the '60s, you could cut the tension in America with a
knife. I see the young people here. We were not allowed to wear
Army uniforms on the street. We would get stoned or spit on.
The society was in turmoil. We were coming loose at the
fringes. The Yale, Berkeley, Harvard campuses were in revolt.
Kent State was in turmoil. We had blood in the streets, and
yet, we stayed committed to a space program through the death
of John Kennedy. 1968, we lost Robert Kennedy. 1968, we lost
Martin Luther King. Our society was questioning itself, but we
stayed with the commitment to space.
We are seeing a challenge today on our space program. We
must remain strong. Ares I, Ares V, is not an option. It is
essential to the United States. We represent six percent of the
world's population. In order for us to maintain our
superiority, in order for us to maintain what we know we can
achieve, space is absolutely essential. It is the high ground
scientifically, whether we want to know what is in the Van
Allen fields, or it is essential for us to maintain our
military superiority.
I certainly agree and appreciate the panel. You can tell I
am fascinated and dedicated to space. I am an oncologist by
training. What has happened in space has allowed our CT scans,
our MRIs, the miniaturization of our instruments. The
development of drugs in space is our next frontier. We have to
do this. It is no longer an option. So when we hear it
discussed as can we afford it, yes, we have to afford it.
So, thank you for being here. I really appreciate it. I
have one question for Mr. O'Brien. You said on a blog that you
were tired of hearing that we cannot sustain our space program
during hard times. The truth is that $18 billion, NASA gets a
fraction of 1 percent of the U.S. budget. Chump change, I used
to tell people, it is about what we spend collectively on
coffee each year. I appreciate you, by the way. Stay with it.
Mr. O'Brien. Yeah. Thanks.
Mr. Griffith. In your opinion, what should we be doing to
let taxpayers know that the return on investment from our
investment in space is absolutely huge? We have to market this.
Mr. O'Brien. So, maybe we should put the meatball in that
Starbuck's latte. What do you think?
Mr. Griffith. Absolutely.
Mr. O'Brien. What, we get Starbuck's, but no bucks for the
stars? You know, something like that. I don't know. I think
that the more we remind people of what we spend, and really, in
the context of all that has transpired in this country in
recent months, when you consider the size of these bailouts,
the NASA budget just seems so tiny. It really does, and
shouldn't NASA get a bailout, too? And it doesn't need much to
keep going. It really doesn't.
And you know, it is, in a sense, it is a testament to the
success, and the fact that there is a natural interest in this,
that people assume we spend all this money on space and on
NASA. It gets tremendous bang for its buck, and it is very
difficult to quantify its value to our society, in the way it
inspires our children, in the way it provides high tech jobs,
in the way it ensures national prestige.
Look, India would love to have a manned space program. Per
capita annual income in India, about $800. Now, if Calcutta can
afford it, can't Cleveland? And what is it that they are
learning that we have forgotten?
Mr. Griffith. One last comment, Madam Chair. Thank you for
allowing me to comment. The great danger here is that we are
going to be sitting in our living rooms with our feet propped
up, having our gin and tonic, and the NASA touchdown, or the
space touchdown on the Moon are going to be two Chinese. And I
think the line is drawn. The challenge is there. It is another
1957 Sputnik moment, and we have to meet that challenge.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Chairwoman Giffords. Thank you, Mr. Griffith. Now, we are
going to hear from Congresswoman Kosmas, who represents KSC.
Communicating the Value of the ISS to the Public
Ms. Kosmas. Thank you, Madam Chairman, and I appreciate
everyone who is here today. Kennedy Space Center is in my
district, and I have become a very vocal and outspoken
cheerleader for space.
As I tell my constituents, I live about thirty miles up the
river from Kennedy Space Center, and I have seen the Shuttle
launches from every imaginable place, whether it is a rooftop
or a boat, or the top of a car. We have seen, the beach,
anywhere you can imagine seeing one, we have seen them. But
since being elected to Congress, I have had the pleasure of
having a little greater view, and I want to say that I have
been preaching in my district very much the same kinds of
things that you all are talking about today, that we are
missing an opportunity to ensure that the next generation is
inspired by what we do in space, and that they understand the
significance of it.
And so, I am, again, I am part of the choir that you are
preaching to, and now, I am preaching back to you. But at the
same time, I think it is important that we do put a focus on
how important this is to our lives and to our national
security. I liked your comment, General Lyles, that
communication and education are seeds for inspiration. I think
that is a really good quote to use.
I also appreciate what the Space Foundation does, and I
love the TV. What I had envisioned at some point, was that
someone would do a commercial like what you were talking about,
and literally take it from an average person's life today, and
withdraw, one by one, it is kind of the counter to putting a
sticker on something, is to say take away, one by one, all of
those developments that have been created as a result of our
interest in science and technology that began with our space
exploration, and see what is left. Because I think the next
generation would be shocked to know how sparse many things
would be, many arenas would be.
So, that is just my one, two cents worth. I have been
working very hard, as I have said, within my district, to
ensure that the people there are working in the school systems,
that we are advancing the STEM programs, and that we are doing
all of those possible opportunities of bringing astronauts into
the schools and everything, to do this. We also, the Chairwoman
and I, have taken a CODEL, of our Congressional delegation, of
our fellow Congresspeople, to Kennedy Space Center, to see a
launch. Unfortunately, it was scrubbed, but we had a really
good opportunity to tour the Space Center, and for others to,
in this body, who provides the opportunity for NASA to do what
it needs to do for them to get a firsthand feel for how
exciting it is, how challenging it is, and how inspirational it
is.
So, I have anointed himself as the cheerleader within
Congress, along with the Chairwoman, to make sure that we bring
along our colleagues, in order to see the importance of it.
I had one question. Again, I really appreciate all the
comments here, but this is for Mr. O'Brien, and it has, it
references a comment that you made also on a blog. In the time
period when the Shuttle retires and the Orion, the time between
those two things, known as the gap, the only symbol of U.S.
human space flight will be the International Space Station. And
in May 2009, you did a blog about human space flight and the
Hubble, and you said: ``Sadly, most Americans do not fully
appreciate the amazing accomplishment that the International
Space Station is. They overlook its incremental role in pushing
out the frontier, and they see it more like a big public works
project.''
And I think, you know, we have talked a lot about the
Shuttles and the launches, but we haven't talked a great deal
about the International Space Station, the investment that the
United States has made in that fabulous frontier.
Could you suggest to me some ways in which you think we
might be able to advance the recognition of how significant
that is?
Mr. O'Brien. Aside from sending me there?
Ms. Kosmas. I want to go too.
Mr. O'Brien. Let us go together.
Ms. Kosmas. Okay.
Mr. O'Brien. That would be a great story.
Ms. Kosmas. You are on.
Mr. O'Brien. I, you know, I think we don't know the story
of the Space Station yet, because it just finally got a six
person crew. Imagine that. There are going to be 13 people on
that Space Station for the next couple of weeks. The toilets
better keep working, I will tell you that, right.
It is very exciting, after all these years. You know, I
remember looking at the sketches for Freedom in the mid-'80s,
and to finally see it looking like those sketches is very
exciting to me. Why that hasn't resonated with the public, you
know, it is, you know, who likes to watch buildings being
built? You know, six year old kids, right? It is a lot like
that. It has been very slow, incremental process, an amazing
engineering challenge, which in many respects, some would argue
exceeds on an engineering level what was accomplished in
Apollo. It is an amazing thing, but it is still only 250 miles
above us, and it is difficult, and it requires a little bit of
nuance to explain to people why that is important, when you are
talking about looking at new horizons, new worlds, and
exploring the solar system. But it is all part of the picture.
I don't think that message has come through very clearly.
That could be some of the media's fault. That could be a little
bit of NASA's fault. It could be that the public is kind of
jaded. You know, some of this is, they go to see a movie, they
go to see Star Trek, and they expect NASA to have warp drive,
you know, or you know, they still think there is an antigravity
room at the Johnson Space Center. So, in some respects,
Hollywood has been a terrible foe of the reality, because it
pales by comparison. The real thing is awfully darn hard. But
that is what Kennedy challenged us to do in September of '62 at
Rice University. Do it because it is hard.
Ms. Kosmas. Well, thank you very much for that answer. Do I
have any time left?
Chairwoman Giffords. Yeah, Ms. Myers, would you care to
comment?
Modernizing Public Relations on the ISS
Ms. Kosmas. Ms. Myers, would you like to comment?
Ms. Myers. Just want to add on top of that, too. Now, if
you can get us to be able to capture the stories on that Space
Station, of all these people living together, and hands-on, how
they are doing their work, and see it and feel it, and it is
real, and it is real people, real passion, real stories. It is
like a smart version of Big Brother that is going on. So,
again, make it relatable to people. Open it up, so that they
can twitter and talk to us. Make it real. Make it alive. These
are heroes. These are great stories, willing to be captured.
Don't make it so sanitized. Bring it to life.
Ms. Kosmas. Well, that would require overcoming the
timidity, right?
Ms. Myers. That is right.
Ms. Kosmas. Okay. General Lyles.
General Lyles. If you don't mind, just one comment about
the Space Station. There is a great story to be told about what
it is, but also, the story that needs to be told about what it
could be. One of the major things at the Human Spaceflight
Commission that Norm Augustine is trying to, is currently
chairing, and I am a part of, is looking at is what happens
after 2016? Currently, the budget plans for the Space Station
run out for the United States at 2016, so the fact that the
Space Station has been declared a formal National Laboratory,
as a possible testbed for great science, and there are great
science experiments that are possible up there with the
infrastructure currently on the Space Station, if something
isn't addressed about how to extend it beyond 2016, which
obviously includes budgetary, then none of the possibilities
are going to be realized.
That is one of the things the Human Spaceflight Commission
is going to be looking at, but it is more than a story of what
it is. It is a story of what it could be and should be.
Ms. Kosmas. I completely agree with you there, and I hope
we are able to assist in extending the time period budgetarily.
Yes, Ms. Smith.
Ms. Smith. And I think that that also requires engaging all
of government in this endeavor. And what I mean by that is, the
fact that the Space Station allows experimentation, scientific
experiments to go on, maybe this is something that NIH needs to
be more aware of, and to identify parts of its budget that
could be allocated to increase the number of experiments on the
Space Station. We have got conditions that we are trying
desperately to solve, and space provides a ready opportunity, a
laboratory for experimentation that I know, as a public member
of board at NIH, that work is not being exploited. The Space
Station is an opportunity to conduct those experiments.
Ms. Kosmas. Thank you very much. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
Reducing Mission Risk
Chairwoman Giffords. Thank you. Next, we are going to hear
from Congresswoman Edwards, who represents Goddard.
Ms. Edwards. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and thanks so
much for holding this hearing. You know that is a passion of
mine to tell the NASA story. I spent several years at Goddard
Space Flight Center, working on the Spacelab project, and feel
really passionately about the story that NASA can tell.
I think one of the challenges has always been, and I think
part of the reason that I ended up actually at Goddard was
because, not because I was an engineer by training initially,
but because I was an English major, and because they needed
people who could communicate all of the wonderful technical
work that was being done to the rest of the world.
And so, I am glad to have been able to share in that
experience, and you know, having grown up, also, on the space,
you know with the space program sort of embedded, I feel that
passion, but I am not sure that it is a passion that is widely
felt across the United States. And you hear that from our
colleagues, and I think this is part of the challenge that the
Chairwoman expressed, among our colleagues who, you know, with
a lot of other national priorities and needs of the American
public, often stack that against the space program, and say,
what do we get out of it? Well, our job, NASA's job, really, is
to share with the American public what it is that we, indeed,
get out of the program.
And I know, apart from my work experience at Goddard Space
Flight Center, that what we get is we get lives that are saved
and changed. When I was in a car accident four years ago, but
for NASA's airbags in my car, I don't know that I would be
sitting here today. And I think that we have to tell that story
in a real way to the American public, and so, I share the
passion that each of you has expressed in very different kinds
of ways, want to acknowledge Discovery Communications. I know
that half of the building is in the Fourth Congressional
District in Maryland, of Discovery Communications. That is an
interesting block.
But I want to say also, and just ask you to respond to it,
is that we have the challenge at NASA, of exploration and
science and risk-taking, and I would like you to focus on that
risk-taking, because that requires a lot of investment, and
sometimes, it works, and sometimes, it doesn't. It is the
nature of exploration and science. And we tend to, in the
public, we can highlight the failures when it doesn't work, and
not how we build on that in science, because we build toward
the next success.
And I would like you to share with us ways in which you
think that NASA can even communicate some of those failures in
the most positive way, for the public to understand why the
investment is needed, and sometimes, why it works and it
doesn't work. Ms. Smith.
Ms. Smith. Yes. Share the risk, is what I would say. We
have an entrepreneurial new space community that is galvanized
to be a part of the future of space. NASA has an excellent
example of how it has approached it in its COTS program, where
the risk is shared, because if the company, if the private
company, does not meet its goals, it doesn't get paid.
I don't think that the government needs to take on all of
the risk when it has such a willing partner. What would happen
if low-earth orbit were turned over to the entrepreneurial
community, to the new space community, and NASA could get on
with its exploration mission? That is a current question, a
question in need of an answer, but also, in a way that
galvanizes the entrepreneurial spirit, which has been so much a
part of our nation, in a real way, in a beneficial way.
Share the risk.
Improving Communication to the Public
Ms. Edwards. Ms. Myers, I wonder if you could comment on
that, in terms of the way we communicate with the public?
Ms. Myers. I think people can relate to, you learn more in
failure sometimes than you learn in success, and that science
is a journey, and exploring and growing is a journey. And I
keep bringing everything back to how do you make it relatable,
how do you tell these great stories that go on? And I think it
is the honesty of there are big goals that people are out to
do, and that NASA is out to accomplish, and it is sharing those
stories, so that when it fails, you explain it. You see people
go through okay, we are excited. We think this is all going to
happen, and when it fails, you tell those stories. What did you
learn from that failure that can push that out?
It is getting people invested in their minds, in ways that
they can relate to, and in their hearts, so that these become
something that you feel invested in. And I think if you go back
to the space program in the '60s, we were all rooting along. We
are all invested in there. These were our heroes. And how do we
make those stories, how do we make those risks relatable and
connect to it, and I think that is part of it? A different spin
journalistically, than to capture people's imagination and take
them along for the ride. The successes as well as the failures,
what did you learn from it? Because science is about questions,
and when you have those questions that are out there, you get
the answers. That leads to more questions. And if you don't
keep experimenting, you don't move it forward.
Ms. Edwards. Well, thank you very much, and Madam
Chairwoman, my time has expired.
Chairwoman Giffords. Mr. Rohrabacher, would you like to go
now, or would you like to wait until after Mr. Wilson?
Mr. Rohrabacher. I can hold on for a few minutes.
Chairwoman Giffords. Okay. We will go to Mr. Wilson. Mr.
Wilson.
Examining NASA Promotion Techniques
Mr. Wilson. Thank you.
Mine is not so much a question as one that, I live in Ohio.
Unfortunately, I don't have a NASA center in my district, but
we certainly do have NASA Glenn in Ohio, and I was just amazed
when I was elected, and actually started learning more about
NASA Glenn and what really happens. The amount of jobs that
have been generated throughout our state, the amount of
research, and the very things that I just sort of took for
granted, as a lifelong Ohio resident, that those were not, I
didn't know they were connected. And I think that was talked
about earlier.
And so, mine is a question of, one of the gentlemen said he
thought it would be a good idea that everything that was
generated from NASA research would have a little NASA sticker
on it. That is the best idea I have heard in a long time. And I
think it is very good.
I like the idea, because really, so many times, even those
of us who live in Ohio, and have been around NASA Glenn all of
our lives, don't realize the intensity in our lives that has
gone on there. So, how do we do a better identification, or a
better education, if you will?
General Lyles. Congressman, I am going to be a little bit
parochial myself, since I commanded Air Force Materiel Command
at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Dayton, Ohio. I had the
same problem in the United States Air Force, with all the
technology programs we were involved in, and particularly, I
would use Ohio as an example. We never did a good job of
communicating, communicating to the public and the state that
you had Glenn Research Center, you had Wright-Patterson Air
Force Base, the center of all technology for the United States
Air Force, but nobody ever talked about it.
And it was sort of self-imposed. We don't, we did not have
great communicators who could tell the story for us, people
like Debbie. And where we did have communicators, we didn't do
a good job of educating them on the facts, so they could get
the story out, and utilizing their great communicative skills.
To me, I have always used one three word term for great
management. It is communicate, communicate, communicate. And
somehow, if we could take that seriously, and do a better job
of bringing all of the right people to get the word out, I
think we can do a far better job in Ohio and the other 49
states, and even the world, for that matter.
Mr. Wilson. You know, I attended the fifty year celebration
last fall, and it was held in Cleveland, and it was amazing the
amount of people, and certainly, the astronauts that have come,
the heroes that have come from Ohio, but yet, it doesn't all
connect. And I think that communicate, communicate, communicate
is a big part of where we need to be.
Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
Chairwoman Giffords. Thank you, Mr. Wilson. Excuse me, Mr.
Rohrabacher.
Will the Private Sector Play a Greater Role in the Future?
Mr. Rohrabacher. Thank you very much. I apologize for being
late, and we run from one thing to another here on Capitol
Hill. And General Lyles, nice to see you again, and we have
followed each others career for so long now, and I congratulate
you for all the wonderful things you have done, and the rest of
the panel as well, in terms of space.
Let me, however, put a little bit of a different twist on
communicate, communicate. I think, I see, when I was a young
reporter, one of the first stories I covered as a younger
reporter was when Senator, I even forget his name now. He was,
it will come to me. In California, and he was only one term, so
I don't need to remember him, but he was endorsing the Space
Shuttle, and anyway, when I went there, there was only a couple
reporters who showed up, and it was there in Downey, where they
had the markup of the Space Shuttle. And when I went in, there
were five PR men there ready to meet my every need. Would you
like a cup of coffee? How about some tea? Would you like a
sandwich? How about this big packet of information? Pictures?
Would you like to get a picture here? Five of them. I was
making $100 a week, and I think they were making $500 a week
each.
I think NASA has a lot of money that it spends on
promotion. It does. I mean, even to this day, I will look at
the NASA Channel. There is a lot of promotion going on. I think
where we are weak is not communicating. I think where we are
weak is not focusing on specific things that we can do in
space, and we can show specifically how they impact on the
lives of our people. And there is such an array now of things
that we depend upon from space. Space-based assets, I used to
only be able to call my grandparents when I was a kid, like
once a month at most, and it was a $5 call, you could barely
hear it. You had to go through operators who hated you for
bothering them, and because of our space-based assets, that
call, that was $5 in those days, and in this day's money, it
would be like $25. And we brought down the calls where people
can call up their loved ones and communicate. Space-based
assets.
And we could go through the whole thing now, where space-
based assets have made such a significant change in our lives,
I don't believe the American people understand that. It is not
necessarily communicate, communicate, but looking specifically
at what things that have changed lots, not some guy, where they
see the guy taking a space walk, and we get all sorts of
pictures of the guy taking the space walk, and it looks like
fun, but how are our lives changed? How will our lives change
in the future?
I was just, I have this question for General Lyles. Do you
see, first of all, I see the private sector playing a much
greater role now than what it did in the past, and do you see
the commercial space in, efforts will actually play a greater
role as well in the future of this trend, toward having
commercial enterprises, rather than just government-run
enterprises in space?
General Lyles. Congressman Rohrabacher, it is great to see
you again, and the answer is absolutely. One of the
recommendations, key recommendations of our National Research
Council study was the need to look at the infrastructure and
strategies on how people are involved in the space activities.
And it wasn't so much to imply that there shouldn't be
leadership and expertise at the NASA centers, but the NASA
centers need to figure out a way they can open up the aperture,
if you will, to allow commercial entities, academia, and others
to sit at the table, and to provide solutions to help solve the
problems.
Today, the perception is, everything is NASA-centric. That
may or may not be true, but commercial entities, and certainly
academia feel they have been left out, in some cases, as our
report points out, and we think just changing the way you
approach business and the way you approach allowing people to
work the solution will go a look way towards achieving that
goal.
What Should NASA Do Regarding Space Debris?
Mr. Rohrabacher. We are not talking about major new
expenditures. We are talking about making sure we open up the
way we do business, so that people who, on the outside of the
circle, can now get involved, and they are already involved in
some ways, but expanding that.
One other question about this. To get the, to utilize space
and the potential of space, we are facing a huge roadblock that
nobody seems to want to face, and that is space debris. And I
personally, of course, have focused a lot of my activity in
this committee on near-Earth objects which are coming down and
space debris.
I would just ask to the committee in general. Shouldn't we
be focusing on that effort, to clear that space debris, so that
we will open up new opportunities, without having to worry
about a bolt coming through somebody's new space station, or
space project?
General Lyles. Well, my answer is, I think there is
attention, greater attention now to that particular problem.
And something I think, again, our report points on, there is a
need for greater integration and coordination amongst the
different agencies, particularly the civil space agencies and
DOD, on how you address common problems.
And one common problem is what do you do about space
debris? It is sort of a global commons, if you will. There is
international interest in this. This is an opportunity to bring
a lot of different players to the table.
Mr. Rohrabacher. It certainly is. Yeah.
General Lyles. Commercial, international partnership, et
cetera. I think it is sort of a ripe sort of example for people
to tackle as an enterprise.
Mr. Rohrabacher. That is exactly right, general. We can
bring people like the Russians and other people in, and the
Europeans. We can make this an international effort that would
clean up the skies, so that we can use those heavens.
Anyway, thank you very much, Madam Chairman.
Chairwoman Giffords. Thank you, Mr. Rohrabacher. And
remember, we had a pretty interesting hearing on space debris
about two months ago, and hopefully, we will follow up with
that as well.
Mr. Grayson, please.
Viable Space-based Business Models
Mr. Grayson. Thank you.
Interesting movie in the theaters right now called Moon. I
don't know if any of you have seen it. The premise of the movie
is that there is a manufacturing operation on the Moon that
mines helium-3 and sends it back to Earth for use in fusion
reactors on the Earth.
I am not going to ask you for a movie review, but it does
raise an interesting thought, which is what are the
possibilities for actually using space for economic purposes?
At this point, historically, we only have one successful model
in that regard, and that is satellites. Satellites are a viable
business that provide economic benefit that exceed their costs,
and therefore, has functioned as a business over the past
couple of decades.
We are starting to see the beginnings of a second business
like that, like tourism, space tourism. And over the course of
the next decade, we will see how that pans out, but it looks
like there is the possibility that we will be able to, again,
provide goods and services that exceed the costs of production,
and therefore, have a viable business model.
What I would like to know from all of you, in my three
minutes and 53 seconds remaining, is what other potential
models do you see in the future? What models can be viable
economic uses of space in the next 20 years, or even the next
50 years?
Let us start with you, Ms. Smith.
Ms. Smith. Certainly, there are companies that are looking
at other uses of space for business purposes. One such company,
Virgin Galactic, I am consulting with them. And while their
core business will continue to be space tourism, they are
looking at non-space tourist markets, solar energy, atmospheric
testing, using the White Knight captive carrier vehicle, which
has the capacity and the ability to provide itself as a testbed
for other kinds of testing, as a business. Bigelow Aerospace,
with its space habitats, has already offered a number of
business opportunities to other countries who want to do
astronaut training on platforms, when our Space Station is not
available, other parts of the world might look at that as a
business opportunity.
So, I think that people who are in this for the long haul,
and many of the companies that I have worked with in the past
and continue to are, are looking at playing it full out, all
the way out, exploiting all of the opportunities that exist in
space for business purposes, but also, to benefit mankind.
Mr. Grayson. Well, some of the other opportunities that
have come up over the years, but haven't reached fruition yet
are other forms of energy production. We have heard of that.
Ms. Smith. Yes, solar energy.
Mr. Grayson. Zero gravity high precision manufacturing.
That is one that has come up from time to time. Occasionally,
biotechnology applications. I want to know what you think are
the cutting edge, the ones that are most likely to come to
fruition. What about you, Ms. Myers?
Ms. Myers. Would like to do a little bit more research on
that, and get back to you on it.
Mr. Grayson. Okay. General?
General Lyles. Congressman, I, you are talking mostly about
commerce and business in space, and utilizing space. I have
also always wanted to focus on commerce as a result of space
technologies.
The best example of that, of course, is GPS. Nobody could
have envisioned when the GPS program was started by the Air
Force, where it would lead, in terms of all the services. And I
think, when you look at the technologies that will come out
from energy perspective, with the electric propulsion for
satellites, advanced materials even greater than the ones we
have today, lighter, more durable, et cetera, those
technologies generated as a result of space activities, I
think, will change the way we do things around the world in so
many different ways.
It is commerce as a result of space, not in space, but to
me, that is just as viable and just as valuable.
Streamlining Viable Aerospace Business Models
Mr. Grayson. All right. So, it seems like we have a number
of different alternatives here. They are all possibilities.
What do you think that we can do to try to see that those are
more likely to come to fruition? In other words, how do we make
the future come faster? And Mr. O'Brien, I haven't picked on
you yet.
Mr. O'Brien. Well, see, I am a big believer that the area
we should be looking at is space-based solar power. I think
that is, when you start looking at the numbers, and you start
comparing it to say, building another nuclear plant on the
ground. It is not that far off, and one way that you could get
that going is, there are certain applications, specifically at
the Pentagon, for example, where there is a need to get remote
power to remote installations, and in order to keep an
encampment in a hostile part of the world going, can be very
expensive and very risky, as you convoy in fuel and whatever
you need.
Wouldn't it be nice if the government, perhaps, started
looking at some, maybe some seed money to think about small,
space-based solar power applications that could take care of
forward bases for the Pentagon? They certainly have a lot of
money, right?
Mr. Grayson. Well, it is a very interesting subject, but my
time is up. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
Improving Outreach to Children
Chairwoman Giffords. Thank you, Mr. Grayson. When I think
about how we make NASA and space more relevant to Americans. It
is really making NASA relevant to all Americans, and you know,
I mean, from my vantage point and Members of the Committee, we
look out and we see you, but we also see the portraits of
former Chairs of this committee.
And if you look around and you see all of the Chairmen,
they look surprisingly similar in many ways. And I know that,
obviously Mike Massimino was the first astronaut to twitter
from space, but now, we have the first astronaut twittering in
Spanish in space, and that, of course, is Jose Hernandez. And
you know, it is true, NASA has done a much better job
recruiting astronauts and training astronauts that don't,
aren't all the same type of American. But I am not convinced
that we are doing a good enough job reaching out to a more
diverse audience of kids.
And I was just hoping the panelists could talk about ways
that we could do that, either from an educational standpoint,
or a marketing standpoint, or what NASA is able to do. Ms.
Myers.
Ms. Myers. This is a subject I am very passionate about. It
is making, reaching out to kids in school, reaching out to make
it come to life, reaching out to empower kids that it is cool
to be smart. Because for so many years, the smart kids didn't
feel empowered to be smart, especially in the inner cities. So,
that was why we turned to a Will Smith, who is a role model,
and said you are smart. You did it. You grew up in
Philadelphia. Be a role model, and inspire kids that, to get
excited about science, space, innovation, capture their
imagination, and to make it something proud to be involved in.
And to empower teachers, to give them the tools that they
need, because kids learn differently. They learn as individuals
in different ways, and it is a new generation that grows up
with video games and twittering, and on the net, and they watch
TV differently than any generation. So, empowering those
teachers with the tools to be able to capture kids'
imagination.
And I think we all have to do a better job of getting kids
excited about what careers exist. Because we don't tell the
stories of the people, and what lights them up, and what gets
them excited about their jobs. And when you talk to people in
the space program, and you have a conversation of why did you
get into this, or tell me what you really get excited about at
the end of the day, or what are you working on, they become
childlike, and it is contagious.
We have to do a better job of getting those messages to
kids, so that they see a bigger array of jobs to choose from,
and we get them excited that they can change the world. And it
is important subject.
Marketing Role Models to the Public
Chairwoman Giffords. Let me just touch in on something. I
was speaking with a woman astronaut a couple of days ago about
how many women there are in the United States Congress, and our
percentages are actually very similar, the women in the
astronaut corps and the women in Congress. And while I think
for men going into politics, there is sort of the sense of,
well, I am the best person for the job. Of course I should get
elected. I can't say whether or not it is the same for someone
who goes through the rigorous aspects of what it takes to be an
astronaut, but I know, as a woman in politics, for me, it was
meeting another woman and seeing her do it, and realize if she
can do it, I can do it.
Ms. Myers. Right.
Chairwoman Giffords. So, it wasn't so much even having the
information. And again, I think that is a story that you will
hear from women that intended to go into this area. So, I am
just curious whether or not the message also should be
different for a different audience, whether it is different
gender or different ethnic background, whether or not those
messages should be different, and reach out to those large
populations we have in this country.
Ms. Myers. It is that relatability factor. It is so
important that we need those role models, and that we change to
whoever we are trying to appeal to and speak to, present those
role models and make it real, make that connection come to
life. So absolutely.
Creating a Role Model: Example
Chairwoman Giffords. Mr. O'Brien.
Mr. O'Brien. I think NASA should really go out of its way
to put those role models forward. I mean, I really do think it
is important to hear from those members of the astronaut corps,
and make sure they are front and center. That should be a very
high priority, when it comes to any public affairs campaign.
And just when you talk about, you know, engaging kids, you
know. It is really important that they also have a sense of
participatory exploration. I am on the Board of Directors of
the Challenger Learning Centers, which I know you are all
familiar with. My first experience there was just amazing. I
walked in with a CNN crew in tow. This is a room full of middle
schoolers, and usually, a room full of middle schoolers plus
camera crew leads to havoc. And they are waving, they are
making, they act like kids. They act like kids, you know.
And I walked there, and they are in this mission control
center, and we are getting the camera in their face, and they
are like get away from me, we are trying to save the Space
Station right now. I thought wow, this is magical. Imagine
that. This is something that really has engaged kids, you know.
You know, that is how kids learn. They didn't know they were
learning. They were having a ball. And who knows how many of
those kids, you know, I am convinced one of those kids will be
on Mars one of these days, you know. Probably went to a
Challenger Learning Center.
And I was just at one recently, the Lower East Side of
Manhattan, and it was in the midst of astronaut Scott
Parazynski, recently summated Mount Everest, and I was part of
that project, helping him tell his story in, you know, viral
Web 2.0 way. I never got to leave my laundry room. He got to go
to Everest, but in any case, I brought down, we did kind of a
two way conversation with these kids using Skype with, you
know, this astronaut at Everest, to a group of kids across all
ethnic origins and socioeconomic, you name it.
And kids are kids. They were fascinated by the whole thing,
and there was nothing about it, I didn't detect a barrier.
Nobody in that room said I can't do that. As a matter of fact,
everybody was like wow, this is cool. I want to be a part of
this. So, it really isn't rocket science, but it does take
money, and it does take effort.
And you know, the kind of science teaching I got,
unfortunately, kind of turned me off, and I ended up a history
major, and the rest is history. But who knows? Maybe if I had
gone to a Challenger Learning Center, I would have gotten my
ride on the Shuttle already. Who knows?
Telling the Story of Astronaut Diversity
Chairwoman Giffords. Thank you. General Lyles.
General Lyles. Congresswoman, let me just echo one of the
comments made by Miles. As I mentioned, I serve on the
Augustine Human Spaceflight Commission, with Sally Ride and
Leroy Chiao, an Asian American astronaut.
We were down at Marshall Spaceflight Center a week before
last, and just walking through some of the activities and
facilities there, and there, on the wall of one of the
buildings was a poster I have never seen before, and it was a
poster that had very small pictures of all of the astronauts.
Now, obviously, you can imagine the number of astronauts, so
the pictures had to be very small, but it immediately jumped
out at me how diverse we already have in our astronaut corps,
but we don't do a good job of spreading the word, of getting
the word out about that.
We certainly need to do more. I absolutely believe in that,
but let us take advantage of what we currently have, and tell
that story. It just blew my mind away, to look at that poster
and see the diversity that already exists in that astronaut
corps, which could be role models to so many different kids, so
many different inner city places, and around the world, for
that matter.
Chairwoman Giffords. That was absolutely correct. Mr.
Olson.
A New National Space Council: Advisor or Mission Coordinator?
Mr. Olson. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and one question
for you, General Lyles.
In your report, you advocated for the creation of an entity
like the National Space Council, to coordinate the activities
of the various Federal Government space organizations. Do you
envision this entity being a governing body that would
coordinate the actions of the various space agencies, and
direct their programs to comply with the consensus of the
group, or would it be strictly an advisory role?
General Lyles. Congressman, I think it is probably more on
the lines of an advisory role. The last thing that NASA or any
of the other civil space agencies, or even DOD, for that
matter, DOD space need, is another bureaucratic layer in
between their activities and what jobs they have to get done.
What we see the need for, however, is better coordination
and integration of the various space agencies, to look for
those common grounds, look for those things that they need to
work together, to leverage the resources and capabilities of
the various agencies, and probably more than anything else, a
common theme this afternoon, to educate each other on what they
are working on, what they are involved in, what the challenges
are, so we can take advantage of lessons learned and best
practices from each of the different agencies.
Our report specifically said that the President should
charge two senior executives in the Administration, we
specifically mentioned the National Security Advisor and the
head of OSTP, to figure out the right policy and process. We
stopped short, because the Academy does not like to tell the
country, tell the government how to do business and organize,
we stopped short of saying National Space Council, but that is
sort of the role model, or the model that we thought would be
appropriate. There needs to be a process, needs to be an
institutionalized sort of organization to make that happen.
Inspiring America's Youth
Mr. Olson. Thank you for that answer. And I would like to
just make one closing comment, sort of follow up on everything
we have all been, talked about, about what we need to do to
inspire America's youth. And one little story, and some of you
may have heard this before, but it is just a great story. I
love it.
Our youth, the love of space and human space flight is in
them. And I saw it firsthand. I watched the STS-119 launch back
in March, with 60 kids at a third grade elementary school in
Sugarland, Texas. Now, as you can imagine, those kids, they
came in about 25 minutes before the launch, and as seven and
eight year olds would do, they just, you know, sat down. I
talked to them a little bit about what was going to happen,
what they were, expect to see, and opened up for questions.
These kids grilled me. I mean, they grilled me for 24 and a
half minutes, and good questions. And you know, we got down to
25 seconds left on the countdown, and they cut to a camera
angle that had the big mission clock, you know, with the front
of the Shuttle. And of course, didn't see this coming, but you
know, anybody else in the room could have. Those kids started
screaming out the countdown at the top of their lungs, you
know, 25, 24. And they are howling, and having a ball. But
then, the most, the best part of it, the most inspirational
thing happened right down as the countdown got down to about 5,
and the main engine started to come down to life, and then, the
solid rocket boosters fired, and she left the pad. And when she
did that, every kid in that room was quiet and just stared at
that TV, watching that Shuttle climb up into orbit and into
space.
NASA has the power to inspire. It is out there, and we just
need to find a way to tap it. Thank you all for coming today.
Chairwoman Giffords. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Olson. You
know, it wouldn't be a Space Subcommittee hearing, if we didn't
have a chance to hear from Mr. Ralph Hall. So, Ralph, I just
wanted you to, I know you didn't have a question, but we would
love to hear from you.
Mr. Hall. Thank you, Madam Chairman. What a great chairman
you are, and thank you for, not even bad to look at. And I have
tried to get in touch with you when your husband was out of
this world.
Thank you. I have been in a very unhealthy atmosphere of a
health bill, I was giving opening statements, so I am still
kind of goofy, but this is very important to me, and this is a
great witness group here. And I am sorry, I did get to read
some of the opening statements.
I didn't get to hear the questions, but I really thank you,
because what you tell us is things that we need to know for the
future, and I am sure I have an idea of what you said. But what
we are all saying now is, I don't know about what part of the
R&D that we are entitled to or we get, but we need just a
little more of it, because we need to close that four year gap
in there some way.
And I tell this story, and I told it to the gentleman who
is heading up the study, the former CEO of, Norm Augustine,
that, and my kids hate for me to tell them stories about the
Depression and World War II, but I make them listen, and
sometimes, I tell them a story, and then I will wait about ten
minutes, and I will start over telling it again, and their
eyelids will click at one another, you know, hit one another.
And I am just practicing for when I really get in that shape,
you know. Got to be looking ahead.
But I told Norm about the last days of the Battle of
Midway, before the Battle of Midway, which won the Pacific and
ended the war against Japan. We had one carrier that was really
fighting shape. We had another carrier that it was to take
seven months to repair it, to where it could leave the port of
Honolulu. And Admiral Nimitz went aboard, and that was on a
Monday, and after his speech to them, he told them that that
carrier was going to go along with the other carrier, and they
were going to be a certain spot northwest of Midway, waiting
for the Japanese to attack. We had broken their code. We knew
they were coming. We knew where they were coming from. He said
this ship will be ready no matter what it takes.
And that is what I want somebody to say to them. It is
money, and if we can't close it on that four years, either from
one side, using the bird we have, and I don't know any better
way to put it than, other than robbing off of the other two,
but to make it as safe as we can, and get two years down to
meet the two years that we could encourage the completion of
our goal.
It has to be done. We just don't have any choice. We can't
be subject to Russia's whims, and we can't lose Japan and all
those other people, as partners as they are now. We have got so
much to lose, and NASA is great, but I don't think they have
been great enough to let the word go forth of how great they
really are, and what they really do for us, and what they have
done for people my age, and the fallout from health. We simply
have to have our Space Station, and we need to accept nothing
less than that. We just got to fight and battle and scratch for
it. I think everybody here feels about the same way I do about
it, and I certainly thank you all for your testimony.
Chairwoman Giffords. Thank you, Mr. Hall. Mr. Rohrabacher.
Rewarding Scientists and Engineers With Competitive Pay
Mr. Rohrabacher. Yeah. I just would like to make sure that
there is one point that needs to be on the record, at least.
And that is, I think that inspiring young people is more than
just fluff, and a lot of times, when we take PR approaches,
that it turns out to be just fluff, and young people can see
through that.
And as I say, when I went to that first press conference,
they had five PR men for NASA, and all focused on the fluff,
and here is the pictures of the astronauts having fun in the
space walk. That is less inspiring than having NASA being
involved in projects that really are going to affect the lives
of the people on this planet, and that we are fully capable of.
If we are going to inspire young people, we need that, we
need substance, and we have got, the potential for substance is
there. We have now reached a plateau where we have got so much
in our foundation, intellectually, that it is almost unlimited
what humankind will be able to do in the future, because of
what we have, the plateau we have already reached.
If we are going to have young people, just again, this last
point, the young people are not going to be inspired if
engineers and scientists are not paid as much as lawyers. I
mean, it is as simple as that. Right now, you are not going to
inspire young people to get involved in engineering and
scientific endeavors, if they know that engineers and
scientists drive around in old jalopies, and the lawyers drive
around in sports cars and live in beautiful homes, and the
engineers can barely afford to pay their rent.
We have got to make sure our engineers and scientists are
paid well, and to do that, I know this is going to go against
everybody's grain, we should not be bringing in engineers and
scientists from India and China and elsewhere to lower the
amount of wages that will be paid to our own people. We need to
build our own capabilities up, make sure that when someone
becomes an engineer, and sort of bringing down the pay level,
by bringing people in from overseas, we should be paying more
money to our own engineers and scientists.
That starts right in education. We have to pay our teachers
who teach science and engineering more money than we do those
teachers who are teaching history, I am sorry, I am a history
major, but there is lots of people who want to teach history.
We need the scientists and engineers teaching our kids, and the
kids need to know, they are actually, we reward something
because we need those skills. We need to pay the teachers who
teach that more money than someone who teaches basket weaving
or gym or history or whatever.
So, those things, if we are going to inspire people, let us
be serious about it. That is where you start, by making sure
the kids know they are going to, that their own lives are going
to be able to be better by earning more money, by getting into
those professions.
Enough said. Thank you.
Chairwoman Giffords. Thank you, Mr. Rohrabacher. Yes, Ms.
Smith.
Ms. Smith. One of the things that the Space Foundation is
not timid about at all is going into failed situations, such as
failed school districts, with space programs to revitalize, to
inspire and encourage students to get into American science.
We recently stood up such a project in Colorado in a failed
school district, and using space as a curriculum there. I think
that, as we look at K-12, and where does it need to start, and
whether it is appropriate at K-12 or later in the school
system, I think it is appropriate for it to start wherever it
starts, and that we have got to galvanize the interest of
students, get them more excited than they have ever been about
math and science, and the potential, and the possibilities that
space provides.
Having people know what some of those benefits are is a
beginning point. I was talking to a group of 13- to 20-year-
olds last week, and talking about the fact that at the gas
station, that your credit card is cleared by a satellite in
space. Do you know that? They went no, no I didn't know that.
How does that happen? There are too many of those examples like
that, that if highlighted, I think we would be able to bring
this message closer to the average citizen, and we have got to
do that.
Chairwoman Giffords. General Lyles.
General Lyles. Yes. I agree 100 percent with Congressman
Rohrabacher. But I might point out that where, perhaps,
resources are not available to pay people the way they should
be, the other thing I have found that galvanizes and
incentivizes and motivates engineers and scientists is having
great things to work on.
Last week, I was at, as part of the Augustine Commission,
we were out at SpaceX, and talking to Elon Musk's team out
there. Bunch of young engineers and scientists. Every one of
them said exactly the same thing. They are not there for the
pay. Right now, the pay is not there. They are still early
beginning stages of their organization. They are all there for
the excitement of what they can possibly do to contribute to
the space program. I have seen the same thing in the Air Force,
as you know. We don't pay our civil servants a great deal of
funds, but they are all there, because of the excitement of
what they can do, and the possibilities of the technologies
that they can get involved in.
So, that is another way we need to try to motivate the
engineers and scientists.
Matching NASA's Budget With Goals
Chairwoman Giffords. Well, I have one final question, and
it actually stems from the wisdom of Mr. Hall, when he
mentioned the gap that we are going to have with, only now,
seven Shuttle launches remaining.
Mr. Lyles, or excuse me, General Lyles, this is for you,
and looking at your report and the comments made, there was an
observation that NASA is inadequately funded to pursue many of
its responsibilities, and that the Agency is being asked to
accomplish too much with essentially too little.
The report language says: ``A coordinated, sustainable set
of strategies should ensure that responsibilities are
realistically matched to available resources. Such a match does
not exist today. For example, NASA has a central role in civil
space, yet by any reasonable measure, it is inadequately funded
to pursue many of its responsibilities.'' It goes on to say,
the report, that: ``Rather than requiring that a broad and
ambitious program should be fit into an arbitrarily constrained
budget as has been the case in recent years, a sustainable
strategy would first define the program that the Nation is
committee to undertake and then realistically define the
resources that are required to accomplish that program.''
Would you please elaborate for the committee how you were
able to reach that conclusion, and what exactly you meant?
General Lyles. Well, Madam Chairwoman, I think just looking
at all the things that are on the plate for NASA, and again,
our study was of broader civil space activity, but we, in that
particular case, were looking at NASA. All the things that are
on the plate for it, for the Agency, all the missions that they
are being asked to do, all the visions, if you will, for what
we would like to have out of NASA, whether it is space
exploration, whether it is the first ``A'' in NASA,
aeronautics, and they are heavily dependent upon to contribute
to the aeronautical domain for FAA and others, if you will,
that the resources do not match all of the things that they are
tasked to do.
And our recommendation was that we take sort of another
look, if you will, not at taking away any of the missions,
because I don't think any agency is better equipped or better
stated for doing the things that we have asked NASA to do, but
figuring out, how can we set the strategy for when some of
those things get accomplished.
I was part of President Bush's Implementation Commission
for the Space Vision, the Aldridge Commission, back in 2004.
And one of the things we recommended in even taking on the
broad exploration mission was a statement we called go as you
can pay. Recognizing that the resources may not be there to do
everything we want to do in the timeframe, but structure a
program so you could have successes, and move forward, and get
closer to your goal, even within the available budget. But
don't give up the goal.
So, that was sort of the notion for why our study sort of
came up with that particular statement. Let us figure out what
should be the pace, what should be the structure, what should
be the milestones that we achieve with available resources, if
we can't get more to add to the mission?
Chairwoman Giffords. Well, I think I can speak for, on
behalf of the entire subcommittee and the full committee, that
we are anxiously awaiting the report from the Augustine
Commission, and I think the Nation really is waiting, as well.
I have no further questions. Any other Members?
Mr. Hall. Madam Chairman.
Chairwoman Giffords. Mr. Hall.
Mr. Hall. What would you think of a bailout for NASA?
Chairwoman Giffords. Well, Mr. Hall, I believe Mr. O'Brien
had recently, actually, it has been about half an hour,
suggested a NASA bailout.
Mr. Hall. I don't know anywhere they could spend it any
better. And we ought to go demanding those things. You know,
Jay Leno got right to the point, when he said that those
automobile makers ought to keep on making automobiles, and
those folks on Wall Street ought to start making license tags.
And we need to bear down on them, and back NASA up. And it is
money, and if we are throwing money away like we are, right,
left, and sideways, why can't they put it somewhere where it
really means something, to everybody from K to 12 to graduation
from college, and some brilliant people like you four, tell
them we need that.
We ought to start a write-in right today, urging that this
$450 billion laying up there somewhere, out of that first $800
billion, and we just $3 or $4, or maybe $4 or $5 billion. A
little old billion, a little bitty billion dollar bills.
Madam, thank you for a good job.
Chairwoman Giffords. Thank you, Mr. Hall.
In closing, we, of course, have to congratulate our new
Administrator at NASA, Charlie Bolden and our new Deputy
Administrator, Lori Garver, talking about diversity. We are
going to have an incredible new team, from the Obama
Administration, that begins today.
And I think reflected for many of the Members, you know, we
hear this tremendous concern, our national economy, our energy
resources. What is happening in health care, what is happening
in terms of global terrorism? And in terms of, I believe,
representing the best foot forward that our country can make is
having a strong space program. And that is something that I
know that we are going to work collectively on.
So, I want to thank our panelists for being here today, our
witnesses, for helping us remind the Nation, this great
promise, and this great potential that NASA brings to us, and
the ability to communicate that greatness to America and to the
world.
That is the end of our hearing, and I would like the
Members to know that the record will remain open for two weeks,
and if there are additional statements being made by the
Members, they can submit those questions, follow up questions
on the Subcommittee to our witnesses, and the witnesses are now
excused, and the Subcommittee is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:57 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
Appendix:
----------
Answers to Post-Hearing Questions
Answers to Post-Hearing Questions
Responses by General Lester L. Lyles [U.S. Air Force, Ret.], Chair of
the Committee on the Rationale and Goals of the U.S. Civil
Space Program, Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board,
National Research Council
Questions submitted by Chairwoman Gabrielle Giffords
Q1. You testified that ``Today, the perception is, everything is NASA-
centric. That may or may not be true, but commercial entities, and
certainly academia feel they have been left out . . ..'' You went on to
say, ``as our report points out, . . . we think just changing that way
you approach business and the way you approach allowing people to work
the solution will go a long way towards achieving that goal.'' Are
there any examples from previous years in which the way that NASA
worked with commercial entities, academia, and other institutions was
particularly effective? If so, what made those institutional relations
so effective?
A1. First, the committee was concerned that over recent years NASA has
strayed from focusing its energies and expertise on advancing the
frontiers of cutting-edge development of new technological capabilities
and has diverted too much of its attention and resources to the
operation of proven elements of space systems. NASA needs to be the
creative engine that concentrates its energy on pushing the
technological envelop, and it needs to leave the relatively more
routine operation of proven systems to the private sector. Second, NASA
has shifted towards protecting the work of its field centers at the
expense of drawing more broadly on the expertise of some of the
nation's premier universities and other private sector institutions to
pursue civil space program needs.
Q2. What are the implications of your committee's recommendations on
aligning space with national priorities for Federal agencies? Was the
committee suggesting that NASA's mission focus be changed? For example,
what would you envision NASA's role in addressing national priorities
such as the provision of clean and affordable energy to be relative to
the Department of Energy's role? Is there a risk of diffusing the
objectives for NASA to the point that the agency becomes ineffective?
A2. No, the committee did not mean to suggest that NASA's mission
should change but, rather, that its mission should be more consciously
assessed in terms of how it supports broader national needs. For
example, in the case that you cite regarding national energy issues,
the committee meant to emphasize that NASA should recognize that (a)
its climate research program plays a critical role in providing
information that will help policy makers assess the implications of
alternative energy policy decisions and (b) its advanced technology
programs are relevant to searches for new insights to energy technology
challenges. The capacity of civil space activities to serve foreign
policy interests is another example of how NASA can align itself with
broader national priorities. So the committee certainly does not intend
to diffuse NASA's objectives but, rather, to encourage the government
to think about NASA's role in the context of how it has the capability,
within reasonable boundaries of the civil space program, to serve a
range of broader national interests.
Q3. Your report's first recommendation--Placing emphasis on aligning
space program capabilities with current high-priority national
imperatives, including those where space is not traditionally
considered--provides a broad policy basis upon which the committee's
other specific recommendations are made. Are you saying that your other
recommendations cannot be implemented without successfully establishing
such an alignment? Do we risk missing unintended breakthroughs from
broad R&D research if we primarily focus on these national imperatives?
A3. That is not the committee's intention. The committee feels that the
over-arching need is for the civil space program to be understood and
supported for its role in supporting broad national priorities.
Nevertheless, there are important actions to be taken both in support
of that broad national context and to facilitate a meaningful civil
space program at any level. However, it is difficult to cite specific
examples of actions that are needed and that would not also advance
broader national interests. For example, a strong program of scientific
research, a strong Earth observation program, rationalization of export
controls so as to promote a more competitive U.S. aerospace industry,
and a more robust space technology development program are all
necessary to sustain U.S. leadership in space and to make the civil
space program a stronger tool to advance broader national priorities.
Hence, the recommended actions are needed to meet the broadest national
needs and to sustain a viable space program.
Q4. Your report states that ``National space policy too often has been
implemented in a stovepipe fashion that makes it difficult to recognize
connections between space activities and pressing national
challenges.'' The report goes on to recommend that the President ``task
senior executive-branch officials to align agency and department
strategies'' and identity opportunities for how space activities can
address priority issues for the United States and, to an extent, the
world. Could you elaborate on, what specifically, this recommendations
means in practice? To what extent can Federal agencies with different
missions and requirements be aligned? What would you envision as the
challenges in carrying out this recommendation and what are your
thoughts on how those challenges should be addressed?
A4. The recommendation was to urge for a process to gather the
technology needs of various federal agencies, and, to see if these
needs can be addressed by the technical capabilities of the space
program. One way to do this is a broad agency call for technical needs
that can be examined by NASA for applicability to its programs. The
technical needs could be from any agency. Likewise, this process could
be applied in the reverse. That is, other organizations (e.g. 000) may
have technologies that can satisfy NASA's needs. The broad purpose of
this recommendation is to do a better job of leveraging the technical
capabilities and resources of agencies rather than have them all do
their own thing.
Q5. Your committee's report recommended that ``NASA should revitalize
its advanced technology development program by establishing a DARPA-
like organization within NASA as a priority mission area to support
preeminent civil, national security (if dual-use), and commercial space
programs.'' Could you elaborate on what led the committee to make this
recommendation? How would the goals and priorities of this organization
be established? How would it differ from NASA's former Institute for
Advanced Concepts (NIAC)? Should aeronautics technology development be
included too?
A5. Our report explained that ``Because of budget pressures and
institutional priorities, however, NASA has largely abandoned its role
in supporting the broad portfolio of civil space applications, and the
[nation's] space technology base has thus been allowed to erode and is
now deficient. The former NASA advanced technology development program
no longer exists. Most of what remained was moved to the Constellation
Program and has become oriented specifically to risk reduction
supporting the ongoing internal development program.'' We then called
for a program that would be ``focused not so much on technology that
today's program managers require, but on what future program managers
would wish they could have if they knew they needed it, or would want
if they knew they could have it.'' We also recommended that the program
``should engage the best science and engineering talent in the country
wherever it resides--in universities, industry, NASA centers, or other
government laboratories-independent of pressures to sustain competency
at the NASA centers'' and that priorities should be driven by an
extensive, independent, assessment of the current state and potential
of civil space technology. A rejuvenated NIAC could be one element of
such a program but not the only one.
The committee did not address NASA's aeronautics technology
program, but in my personal opinion, NASA's Aeronautics Mission
programs are an example of this problem. Previously, there was little
focus on the fundamental aeronautics needs of NASA or agencies the
agency supports, e.g. the FAA. In the last couple of years, the
Aeronautics Mission area has developed a ``Fundamental Aeronautics''
program that addresses the basic aeronautical sciences and engineering
needs of the future. This Fundamental Aeronautics program has been
especially valuable in nurturing and sustaining critical expertise in
universities and research companies.
Q6. Your report's second recommendation is aimed at NASA and NOAA
taking leadership in forming an international satellite-observing
architecture capable of monitoring global climate change and its
consequences and support the research needed to interpret and
understand the data in time for meaningful policy decisions. In
particular, you call on NASA and NOAA to plan for transitions to
continue demonstrably useful research observations on a sustained, or
operational, basis. As you know, such transitions have been difficult
in the past. What must NASA and NOAA do to make them successful? How
should the broader issue of transitioning NASA R&D into applications
and operational utility to serve national needs be managed?
A6. The 2003 NRC report, Satellite Observations of the Earth's
Environment: Accelerating the Transition ofResearch to Operations,
concluded that ``the [current] transition process in general is largely
ad hoc . . . and no mechanism is available to ensure that the
transition process in general is efficient and effective.'' To put it
more starkly, no one either at NASA or NOAA is explicitly accountable
for planning for and ensuring that transitions are accomplished.
Therefore the report's principal recommendation called for
establishment of ``a strong and effective joint NASA-NOAA office to
plan, coordinate, and support the transitioning ofNASA research to NOAA
operations.''
With respect to the broader issue of transitioning NASA R&D to
serve broad national needs, the committee's recommendation for a DARPA-
like organization to support a preeminent advanced technology program
should have responsibility for facilitating research-to-applications
transitions as part of its charter.
Q7. Your committee's report deals forcibly with the risk of human
space flight. The report also characterizes the high return to be
achieved for conducting human space flight. Is there a mechanism
capable of clarifYing the tradeoff of risk versus benefits for space
activities? If not, what are the key areas of risk and benefits that
should be considered in human space flight? What are some examples of
transformative outcomes?
A7. As you note, the report says that worthwhile human space flight
activities should have the potential for producing transformative
cultural, scientific, commercial, or technical outcomes. Such results
could include achievement of a fundamentally new understanding or
perspective, a more comprehensive approach, an essential new enabling
capability, or the opportunity to visit and observe some unique new
location. The risk-benefit tradeoffs for human space flight are
probably not quantifiable. But the committee felt that an acceptable
U.S. human space flight program should be able to serve broad national
interests in terms of technological development, economic growth, and
inspiration, and should be of such a caliber that they demonstrably
contribute to U.S. global strategic leadership. Examples of such
transformative outcomes in the past would include the Apollo Moon
landings, successful engineering and construction of the ISS, and the
repeated repairs and upgrades of the Hubble Space Telescope.
Q8. Your report recommends that the U.S. government, under the
leadership of the White House, ``pursue international cooperation in
space proactively as a means to advance us. strategic leadership''. The
report recommendation goes on to list several goals that this strategic
international space cooperation should involve including partnerships
in global change studies, expanding partnerships in the use of the ISS,
and engaging developing nations in the use of space technology to
facilitate sustainable development. How did the committee envision the
potential implementation of this recommendation? How would you envision
this strategic leadership be carried out so to align with the US
government's foreign policy goals and agency roles and
responsibilities? For example, is this a topic to be included in a G-8
Summit agenda? Do you see a risk in ``sharing the fruits of our
ingenuity'', as you put it, with others?
A8. There are many areas where other nations have achieved
technological capabilities that are competitive with those of the U.S.
Examples include Europe and Japan in Earth observation and robotic
scientific spacecraft, Europe and Russia in space launch vehicles, and
Russia in human spaceflight systems. In cases such as these, the risk
of collaboration is not about losing our competitive edge by sharing
with others but about losing an opportunity to play global leadership
roles and remaining competitive by cooperating and collaborating with
others. In other cases, the U.S. has an unquestionable technological
lead, for example compared to third world countries in using space
observations to benefit agriculture and other terrestrial economic
sectors. In those cases, the U.S. can also exert leadership to promote
global well-being without putting its technological advantages at risk.
A third kind of interaction involves opportunities to cooperate with
countries where we also compete geopolitically, because civil space
activities provide a means to promote peaceful nonthreatening
partnerships even during times of international tensions. This was the
case with U.S.-USSR cooperation in human spaceflight during the height
of the cold war. This might be the mode for future U.S.-Chinese
cooperation in space.
Decisions about which modes of cooperation to pursue and about
which elements of the program to utilize need to be made at the highest
levels of the government. They need to be made in the context of how
U.S. foreign policy is framed to serve the national interest. Once
those decisions are made, then there are a variety of platforms,
including the G-8 and existing international space fora, at which
proposals can be introduced to foreign partners.
Questions submitted by Ranking Member Pete Olson
Q1. Your committee recommends the creation of a DARPA-like
organization within NASA. What budgetary needs would the creation of
such an office require and if an increase would not accompany it, where
would such funding come from within the current budget?
A1. In testimony before the committee, former NASA Administrator
Michael Griffin suggested that a proper budget for a good advanced
technology program would be about ten percent of the agency's
development budget or approximately $1 billion, and I think that is the
right level. Our report was very clear about the fact that there must
be a realistic match between NASA's assigned responsibilities and its
resources: ``Rather than requiring that a broad and ambitious program
be fit into an arbitrarily constrained budget as has been the case in
recent years, a sustainable strategy would first define the program
that the nation is committed to undertake and then realistically define
the resources that are required to accomplish that program.''
Q2. Please elaborate on the differences as you see them between the
benefits to having a long-term vision as opposed to a more short term
one? How, in light ofPresident Bush's Vision announcement in 2004 and
two subsequent Authorizations by Congress, did the program become
``unfocused?'' What can be done to prevent such a thing from occurring
in the future?
A2. In my opinion, the long-term vision presented by President Bush in
the 'Space Exploration Policy'' of2004 seems to have gotten off-track
both at NASA and in the budgetary process involving OMB. NASA focused
many of its resources and efforts on the Constellation program. Some
basic science programs, and other developments, were not funded if they
did not seem to support Constellation. This was not helped by OMB,
which did not support programs that were not linked to Constellation.
The solution to this is to mandate that any such program be balanced
between long-term needs and short-term efforts, which may actually be
enablers for future capabilities.
Q3. You talk about aligning space program capabilities in areas not
traditionally considered. What are some of those non-traditional areas?
A3. NASA's core mission has always revolved around space exploration,
space science, and space technology. The committee did not intend to
redirect NASA from those roles but to encourage attention to how those
areas could serve a broader range of national interests. For example,
space technology programs can benefit from and contribute to the state
of the art in advanced materials, computational design and modeling,
batteries and other energy storage devices, fuel-cell and compact
nuclear power systems, fault-tolerant electronics, optics, and
robotics. These areas are important in energy and transportation
management, medicine, and many manufacturing sectors. Another example,
which extends to both NASA and NOAA, relates to the fact that Earth
remote sensing measurements from space and studies of the science of
climate change are critically important for energy policy decision
making, because alternative choices about approaches to meeting energy
demands can have profound and profoundly different environmental
effects.
Answers to Post-Hearing Questions
Responses by Patti Grace Smith, Member of the Board of Directors, The
Space Foundation
Questions submitted by Chairwoman Gabrielle Giffords
Q1. Your written testimony refers to the use of new communications
channels such as Facebook to reach out to kids and get them excited
about space. Do we know whether or not social networking media sustain
interest in space? What happens to those Facebook users beyond their
online interaction? What content do you think will be most successful
in sustaining kids' interest in space?
Q2. The trends described in The Space Report 2009 regarding interest
and achievement in the math, science, and technology subjects vital to
the space industry give me pause, especially the finding about 18% and
23% of U.S. high school seniors being proficient in science and math
respectively. Are there any initiatives that the Space Foundation has
undertaken that give evidence of increasing student engagement in math
and science? If so, could you briefly describe them?
A1. We've seen in the past few election cycles that people who connect
through social networking sites, can and will translate their on-line
interest with real world activity and support. The Wall Street Journal,
CNN, Forbes and other established media outlets have all reported that
companies are investing a lot of time and energy into understanding and
eventually harnessing the power of these social networking sites for
their own business interests. Those of us who care about our future as
a space faring nation need to take this seriously and see what we can
learn in order to engage and sustain the interest and support of young
people.
I also feel I must point out the incredible amount of usage of
Facebook and Twitter during the recent political unrest in Iran. These
can be powerful tools.
One caveat I must provide the subcommittee is that usage of social
networking is not an across-the-board phenomenon. Now that Web 2.0 has
been around a few years, researchers are finding that better educated,
more affluent children are utilizing it more than less affluent
children. Our community cannot have a one-size-fits-all approach. We
need to be flexible and adapt communication abilities that fit
whichever audience we are seeking.
As for content, I think we need for it to be-honest, compelling and
present near-term opportunities for young people. We also need to be
ready to jump onto whatever comes after Web 2.0.
A2. We have an entire education department that works with students and
teachers K-12 on improved STEM curriculum. In my full testimony I
touched upon those specific programs. In my oral testimony in response
to a question about education I briefly mentioned the brand new program
the Space Foundation has embarked upon with a school district in
Colorado.
Colorado Springs School District 11 (D-11) has approved a proposal
to create an aerospace-focused middle school in the former Emerson
Middle School in partnership with the Space Foundation.
The new school, which will be named Jack Swigert Aerospace Academy
in honor of former astronaut and Colorado native John L. ``Jack''
Swigert, will open this fall with a space-related curriculum designed
to drive proficiency in science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics (STEM). It is located at 4220 E. Pikes Peak Ave. in
southeastern Colorado Springs.
The Space Foundation will:
Deliver on-site space-related education programs for
students and teachers;
Provide opportunities for students and teachers to
participate in Space FOlindation programs that bring space
industry leaders and leading-edge technologies to the Colorado
Springs area;
Provide enhanced professional development for Swigert
Aerospace Academy teachers;
Create state-of-the-art teaching facilities and
equipment; and
Develop an on-site National STEM Teacher Training
Center that will serve the entire district as well as bring in
educators from throughout the country.
Student Programs
Among the student programs provided at the new space school will be
a customized version of the Space Foundation's Science, Technology, and
Academic Readiness for Space (STARS) curriculum. STARS includes 90
minutes of Space Foundation-provided instruction each week as well as
follow-up classroom activities on topics such as rocketry principles,
astronomy, earth systems science, and principles of flight. Students
may also have opportunities to attend education sessions at the
National Space Symposium and to interact with government and industry
space leaders.
Teacher Programs
The Space Foundation will ensure that teachers have the skills to
provide space-related instruction in the classroom through a series of
in-service, professional development, and training programs. The Space
Foundation will also conduct its Colorado Springs Space Discovery
Institutes at the Swigert Aerospace Academy beginning in 2010. These
intensive week-long classes provide ready-to-use space-related STEM
lesson and activity plans and can be applied toward master's degrees in
a variety of science and space studies specialty areas.
Teaching Facilities and Equipment
The Swigert Aerospace Academy will house three learning labs to
enhance classroom learning opportunities:
The Mission Control Lab, which will open during the
second semester, will simulate launch, flight and landing of a
plethora of satellite space missions.
The Planetary Rover Lab, which will open during the
2010-2011 school year, will include construction of a simulated
Martian terrain to be used for robotics missions using student-
designed-and-built robots.
The Science on a Sphere (SoS) Lab, which will be
built if adequate philanthropic support can be secured, will
house a room-sized global display system that uses computers
and video projectors to display planetary and solar system data
and images onto a six-foot-diameter sphere. Developed by the
National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
SoS can illustrate many compelling images, including
atmospheric storms, climate change trends, ocean temperatures,
and celestial bodies.
Although primarily for use within the Swigert Aerospace Academy,
the labs can also host classes from other schools within the district
and students from other districts, providing additional financial
resources for the school.
Question submitted by Ranking Member Pete Olson
Q1. Compared to other industries, can you give an overview of the
state of the aerospace' industry, particularly in regard to its growth?
A1. Aerospace is not immune to the larger global economic forces
currently at work. Major aerospace companies have begun to have layoffs
due to expected flat budgets at NASA and the Department of Defense on
major new sophisticated programs. The most recent forecast from the
Aerospace Industries Association (AlA) has forecasted for the near term
future reduced federal R&D budgets that will impact American aerospace.
Recently both Boeing and Airbus have had trouble delivering new
flagship airliners on time to their customers.
The most recent Commercial Space Transportation Forecasts from the
FAA's Office of Space Transportation, which looks ahead through 2018,
project an average annual demand of26.7 commercial space launches
worldwide from 2009 to 2018. The forecasts are a decrease of3 percent
compared to the 2008 forecast of 27.4 launches per year. Twenty-eight
commercial launches occurred worldwide in 2008. Additionally, Forecast
International (FI) projects 636 expendable launch vehicles to be
produced over the coming decade, worth approximately $48 billion.
As stated in our 2009 Space Report, the recent credit crunch has
also impacted the ability of commercial space companies to obtain
capital. This crunch may delay the acquisition of replacement satellite
systems by commercial satellite fleet operators. Companies with strong
balance sheets in this period of economic uncertainty may also see to
build alliances with industry partners or seek outright mergers and
acquisitions.
Answers to Post-Hearing Questions
Responses by Debbie Adler Myers, General Manager Science Channel
Questions submitted by Chairwoman Gabrielle Giffords
Q1. In Mr. O'Brien's prepared statement, he said that NASA's Public
Affairs needs to ``speak with one voice.'' At the same time, he
testified during the hearing that NASA workers ``need to be empowered''
and ``spread the word.'' He mentioned being allowed to twitter as one
example of empowerment. That of course raises the issue of how to
approach having NASA speak with one voice while also encouraging
empowered workers to speak as individuals without being concerned about
being ``off message'' can be reconciled. What is your reaction to Mr.
O'Brien's statements?
This notion of ``staying on message'' while also having freedom of
expression is something we've considered at Science Channel as well. We
often have new hosts and presenters on our series with personal
interests in Facebook, Twitter or other forms of social media. Some are
also working journalists, either professional bloggers or print
reporters. We've developed guidelines to help our social media-inclined
talent understand how we talk about Science Channel and when it's
appropriate to share information.
What could be very exciting for NASA is developing a program that
would allow chosen employees to begin using social media. NASA could
identify the best people, at all levels of the organization, not just
at the top, who would be ambassadors to spread the word about their
agency and specific missions. Once selected, they would be trained and
given ground rules, then encouraged to reach out to their social
networks or create new ones. Allowing a large, but selected group of
people to authentically spread the word about their work would give
NASA a greater voice and allow the personalities and passion of the
employee base at the agency shine.
Q2. What do you view as the most significant barriers for NASA in
communicating the relevance and inspiration of space to the public at
large? What would you recommend be done to overcome those barriers?
A2. The biggest challenge is how to make what NASA is doing
understandable and exciting to a general audience. Public-private
partnerships could help overcome this barrier. Science Channel and
other private companies play an important role in getting the word out.
IfNASA could create a forum for regularly sharing information about
their upcoming missions and research, it would allow the private sector
to help them get the general public invested in their success.
Quarterly briefings to media organizations would allow NASA the
opportunity to not just tell us what the data says, but also what it
really means, or could mean to the future. At Science Channel, it's our
responsibility to take the work of NASA and make it relevant to
people's lives--our job is to take the information provided and craft
it into amazing content that lives on television, online, mobile and
devices yet to be invented.
Q3. Your prepared statement speaks to the interest that your viewers
have in space and notes that ``it is one of their favorite subjects''
and ``space programming rated 25% higher' than your network average
during the last quarter. How do you reconcile the interest that your
viewers express with the oft-expressed notion that there is waning
public interest in space?
A3. We look for great space stories and present them in a way that
engages our audience and inspires them to think and feel. It's
important to note that we aren't presenting research papers or showing
missions in real time (unless we are live)--instead we have the
tremendous luxury of following a project for months and editing it into
a riveting hour of television. That's very different than watching a
silent space walk in real time--we can explain what's happening,
provide background about the dangers the astronauts face and put the
mission in the context of human achievement. It takes a team of
incredibly talented producers and editors, as well as willing
astronauts and scientists, to make this hour of television.
Customizing content for different audiences is not a ``one size
fits all'' format, it's an art form. We seek to make people feel a
connection to space. We've found that viewers want information for
their brains, but they need us to capture their emotions at the same
time. In short, we do not believe that interest in space is waning, but
that the citizenry is simply demanding that space information be
presented in engaging and accessible formats that make space relevant
to their lives.
Q4. In your written statement, you note that ''we bring science to
life by making it relevant to people's everyday lives, celebrating the
ingenuity in all of us.'' That gets to the heart of this bearing. How
do Science Channel and Discovery go about making space relevant to
people's everyday lives? In that regard, you note in your prepared
statement that ``the cliche we struggle against is that science is
boring and dry and something that I might not understand.'' How does
Discovery work to entertain without compromising depth and scientific
accuracy?
A4. Scientific accuracy is absolutely essential to all that we do
without it, we're a pure entertainment channel. What we've found is
that a mix of approaches to science is critical to success. We have
nights of very deep science, including physics and mathematics. But
we're also programming lighter nights, with a science trivia show or an
engineering competition series. It's important to appeal to people with
widely different interests in (and understanding of) science. We give
them a base of knowledge and encourage them to sample our more
challenging fare. If presented in the right way--with engaging experts
and great visuals, with a storyline that makes it clear that this
science matters, that it's part of their lives--then we've succeeded.
We also provide a depth of resources online for people who might want
to learn more--this is hosted on a combination of ScienceChannel.com
and HowStuftWorks.com. And, finally, we're experimenting with new ways
for audiences to connect with our mission and content, through Twitter,
Facebook, gaming and mobile devices.
Q5. For what purposes and with what type of content does it make sense
to use social media, such as Facebook and Twitter, for outreach on
space activities and when does it not make sense?
A5. Social and new media is absolutely critical to the future success
of our business. This is an entirely new language for the current
generation. What we've found is that when people feel like they can see
behind the scenes, they get a sense of ownership and connection. When
we open up our content and mission via social media, we give a voice
and personality to Science Channel and we provide a more intimate
relationship to our audience.
A majority of our time has been spent on Twitter outreach--it's an
instantaneous assessment of what our viewers like, what kinds of
information they seek out and how they're reacting to our website or
programming. We have a very active Twitter channel where we host
scientists, talent and our own staff members for live sessions and we
also re-post information that we think is pertinent to our audience--
like interesting articles from Popular Science or a science magic show
in New York City. In the space genre, we actually hosted a NASA
scientist on our Twitter live during the Hubble repair mission. Our
audience loved it--their questions were answered in real time as they
watched the launch.
It makes sense to use Twitter if you have the time to create a
``personality'' for your feed. It helps to have just a few people
creating a voice for the organization and then host people who can
provide a greater depth of information. Imagine how exciting it would
be for people to tweet with a former astronaut during an important
mission. Or with a NASA Mars expert during the next Hollywood feature
film that has a storyline about a colony on the red planet? Using
Twitter would make NASA exciting and more three dimensional.
Q6. In your prepared statement, you refer to Discovery's partnership
with NASA, and other entities, ``to film their amazing achievements and
then bring them to the viewer at home.'' You also noted how a dialogue
with NASA about its research and future missions led to an eight-part
series you'll air on the big questions in space. How well are these
types of partnerships working? What are the best ways to leverage the
strengths of both NASA and outside communications entities to inspire,
engage and educate about space and the benefits of space to society?
A6. The partnership with NASA Goddard that lead to the series with
Morgan Freeman has been a tremendous success. Our first meeting set the
stage for a deeper partnership and we are now creating an ``advisory
committee'' to help us shape the program further. NASA has provided us
with access to scientists, footage and technology and will serve as our
technical advisor on the series to ensure accuracy. Our goal is to take
what NASA is doing now and project it three more steps into the future,
so the accuracy of our projections is critical.
Q7. 1A provision in the NASA Authorization Act of 2008, which became
Public Law 110-422, focuses on ways to enable public participation in
space exploration missions to the Moon, Mars or other bodies by using
technologies that can deliver a rich, multimedia experience of the
actual exploration mission to the public through broadcasts and the
Internet. What are your thoughts on how digital communications and
communications technologies might help bring the public closer to
experiencing space exploration?
A7. As discussed above, there are a multitude of options. NASA could
have a former astronaut or other expert available to twitter during a
key mission, or have interactive quizzes or fast facts available on a
dedicated website page so that viewers could follow up on or dive
deeper into topics they find to be of particular interest, or partner
with media companies who can provide access to supplemental
entertainment and educational resources such as space-related movies,
documentaries, or books, or reach out to schools by showing missions in
the classroom over broadband connections so that teachers can guide
students' experiences as part of their curricula.
Questions submitted by Ranking Member Pete Olson
Q1. What might Congress do to enable better and more effective
partnerships between private broadcasters and government agencies?
A1. Congress' information-gathering and lawmaking authority well
positions it to ensure that public-private partnerships exist. Simply
knowing that Congress feels this is critically important is very
motivating. Pose the questions to us and challenge the public and
private sectors to come up with solutions together. I recommend
starting a media advisory committee to work with NASA and NOAA to help
them better communicate their messages to the media. We need better
access to scientists and people who want to tell their stories and we
also need to help those people learn how to make their stories
compelling. I would welcome the opportunity to help the agencies with
this process and with setting up engaging quarterly briefings for
media.
Q2. What obstacles have you seen within NASA that, as a government
agency, prohibit it from publicizing its achievements?
A2. Because NASA's core mission is not one of story-telling or self-
promotion, but rather one of scientific exploration, it can benefit
from public-private partnerships with entities whose primary mission is
to educate and inspire the pUblic. We were incredibly lucky to find a
champion at NASA Goddard to help us navigate the agency and this has
been critical to the success of our partnership and our ability inform
the citizenry about the exciting things NASA has done and plans to do.
Congressional encouragement of such partnerships and NASA's ongoing
education of its partners about what it is doing are essential to the
creation of vital and productive partnerships-partnerships that tell
engaging stories and make space relevant to people's lives in ways that
would be difficult for NASA to do alone.
Q3. Regarding NASA's communications and messaging strategies; what is
NASA particularly good at? In what forum and on what subjects is NASA
the most effective?
A3. NASA is at its very best when something BIG is happening, such as
potentially finding water on Mars. No one is better at the big finds,
providing free footage, access to experts and amazing resources to
media.
Answers to Post-Hearing Questions
Responses by Miles O'Brien, Journalist
Questions submitted by Chairwoman Giffords
Q1. In your prepared statement, you stated that ``the agency,
dispersed geographically as well by centers of expertise and excellence
-does not speak with one voice as it should. Public Affairs here in
Washington needs more authority to direct the far flung PR operations .
. ..'' In addition, you testified during the hearing that the NASA
workforce needs ``to be empowered . . . because if you unleashed the
power of that workforce, and allowed them to spread the word, we could
just stand by and watch them win the country over.'' You mentioned
allowing workers to twitter as one way to help empower them. How do you
reconcile the need for the agency to ``speak with one voice'' while at
the same time allowing each individual worker to speak as an individual
and not be concerned about being ``off message''?
A1. The remarks may seem inconsistent, but I am talking about the
difference between strategy and tactics. The Public Affairs Office in
Washington needs to have more direct authority over the PAO offices in
the field centers and the EPO personnel assigned to specific mission
directorates. All of these entities have tremendous autonomy to conduct
public relations as they see fit. This leads to inconsistencies,
inefficiencies and parochial interests trumping the greater good for
NASA on a national level. NASA must have a single entity that is seeing
the big picture when it comes to messaging. All that said, there is
tremendous untapped potential to harness the enthusiasm, passion and
knowledge that NASA foot soldiers possess. Social networking is an
amazingly powerful tool to engage people in the adventure of space in a
very personal way. NASA's workforce should be empowered to engage
people in this manner--but just like the PAO and EPO offices in the
Centers and Directorates--the people who engage in social networking
must be aware of the boundaries and the overall priorities of the
agency. NASA is filled with smart people who want to do the right thing
for the agency (and for the great goal of keeping the public engaged in
space) so I suspect the agency might be pleasantly surprised at how
effective this approach might be. Loosening the reins is not without
risk, but the upside far outweighs the possible occasional
embarrassment that might arise.
Q2. What do you view as the most significant barriers for NASA in
communicating the relevance and inspiration of space to the American
people and to the public at large? What do you recommend be done to
overcome those barriers?
A2. The biggest barrier is timidity and fear. Frankly, NASA has become
so worried about making a misstep that will offend a member of
congress, an OSTP staffer or the general public that it often delivers
a message that is bland to the point of banality. The irony is NASA, an
agency that knows as much about risk (and managing it)--is risk averse
when it comes to talking about that very risk. This is a problem that
primarily infects the piloted space side of the house--and has deep
roots in the way the space shuttle program was sold to Congress. NASA
sold the STS as a routine ``airliner-like'' avenue to space--and thus
downplayed the tremendous risk of flying a space shuttle. This gave the
public good reason to tune out when the missions flew--and then
alienated and angered people when it became tragically apparent that it
was not the case. NASA should embrace the risk--and speak candidly
about it. The public will be all the more fascinated if they know the
real stakes when people push the high frontier.
Q3. For what purposes and with what type of content does it make sense
to use social media, such as Facebook and Twitter, for outreach on
space activities and when does it not make sense?
A3. It makes good sense for NASA workers to share the day to day
excitement and challenge associated with their jobs. What is it like to
be faced with a huge problem that no one has solved--and have to think
up a solution--and by the way--human lives are at stake . . .. Or how
do smart people decide where to land on a distant planet. And what are
the trade-offs between weight, capability, budget and time as you build
a spacecraft. What amazing findings have NASA's armada of spacecraft
yielded--and what do they tell us about the universe? Are we alone?
What do NASA people think? Why are they so excited to go to work every
day? Why is learning something really hard, like engineering or
physics, so worth it? Why does an astronaut with a family believe it is
worth risking his/her life to go to space? It goes on and on . . . NASA
is a narrative rich environment. There are so many good stories to tell
that would engage people. The areas where NASA folks on the social nets
should steer clear should be obvious: talking about operational
decisions in real time, commenting on agency policy or making political
statements. But if NASA can trust its people with the lives of its
astronauts, surely they can be trusted to speak freely (within
boundaries) about their work with the public.
Q4. There's an ongoing national conversation about the news industry
being in jeopardy, and the role of journalism in society. With regard
to science, we depend on skilled journalists who can sort through the
complex issues, who can report in a balanced way, and who can help
people understand what they need to know about current science and
research, and how it impacts their families and communities. This
matter is particularly relevant to today's hearing on the relevance of
space to people's lives. To what extent does the quality of journalism
about space affect the public attitudes, understanding, and awareness
of space?
A4. The skilled journalists who have expertise in this realm are still
out there--but they are no longer at the mainstream outlets--which have
gone out of their way to ignore science and technology coverage--Even
in the face of evidence there is a large audience with an appetite for
the content. That said, the mainstream outlets, with few exceptions,
are in their own race to the bottom and no one in Congress or at NASA
should spend much time pondering cures to what amounts to a terminally
ill patient. The good journalists are finding homes in new places. They
are on the web, blogging. tweeting and meeting their audience on
Facebook. They are producing video content for virtually no cost at
all-and they are informing an audience that finds them wherever they
are in the world. The good journalists are still out there but they are
in a different neighborhood. They are no longer constrained by the
confines of Michael Jackson, Balloon Boy and Tiger Woods and thus they
are providing much more in depth coverage than ever. This only further
buttresses the case that NASA needs to be a player in this league.
Q5. You are now covering Shuttle launches for web viewers through a
website. Does the difference between a general audience, as is the case
for national news outlets, and a space-specific audience, as is likely
the case for most space websites, alter the way you report? Are there
any conclusions you would offer as to how space activities might be
reported more effectively to the general public in order to generate
and maintain viewer interest?
A5. Clearly when I am on for six straight hours, I have time to indulge
viewers in minutiae and details that would never see the light of day
on CNN. But as a history major. I come to the technical field always
cognizant of the Humanities Nation. You need to be unafraid to delve
into the world of the left brain--while always operating from the right
brain. It is possible to introduce an audience to complex ideas--so
long as you are learning with them. This is how you keep viewers
engaged and that is where NASA, an organization of scientists and
engineers, often misses the mark with the general public. Not everyone
speaks the language
of space--indeed most people are positively phobic about it.
Finding people who have a foot in the world of the arts and language--
and no fear of the technical is the key to pushing NASA outside its
bubble.
Question submitted by Ranking Member Pete Olson
Q1. What obstacles have you seen within NASA that, as a government
agency, prohibit it from publicizing its achievements?
A1. See response to number 2.
Q2. Regarding NASA's communications and messaging strategies; what is
NASA particularly good at? In what forum and on what subjects is NASA
the most effective?
A4. I would give a gold star to JPL--for allowing the public to engage
in a special kind of participatory exploration. They were the first to
allow people to see science at the same time the scientists got the raw
data--and they have never blinked since then. Their efforts to pioneer
the use of Twitter and other social networks remain in the vanguard for
NASA. In Houston, there are pockets that have understood this and have
pushed the social networking envelope--but it is in spite of Public
Affairs--not because of it. The lesson here is there are passionate
people champing at the bit to share their love of space with a larger
audience. NASA must find a way to give them some freedom--or ultimately
the agency will become irrelevant.